Marstev: Opposition and government do not want to study each other
ERB: When they say that a society deserves the government it has, does the opposition resemble this society as well?
Martsev: This is a copy of an insignificant part of our society, which, first, hates Lukashenka, and, secondly, wants to gain power. This is basically all that one can say about the today’s opposition.
We are talking about a small historical period which started in 1992. Over this period of time, the Belarusian society has chosen a certain political system. We will not discuss whether it is perfect or not; but it is understandable to everyone. There is a president who can do everything, and there are the braches of power controlled by him. Unfortunately, the opposition started acting within this paradigm. Like a mirror, the opposition has tried to reflect a similar system. Under the slogans of a political dictatorship, it has cast a certain united opposition which stands out against the dictator. Opposition must represent a developmental alternative and offer a different view on the political system. So far, everything boils down to the struggle for power.
The society understands it in the following way: there is the president; there is the opposition which fights for the same power that the president possesses. The opposition has not proved to the society yet that it is more attractive and promising.
ERB: The mental opposition seems to be expanding within the society. Does it mean that the political opposition is lagging behind it? Why?
Marstev: The opposition is probably not very bright, because the operation of political parties implies a certain ideology which could be close to certain part of the population. This should be clearly formulated. It can be simple and clear; it can be complex but pronounced in the simple language. Does the opposition possess it?
The parties which call themselves social democratic or liberal democratic have lost all of their peculiarities in their own organizational and political model, created to fight the political system. Ordinary folks cannot distinguish between them. Voters don’t reflect much on whether the political system is wrong or right. They are satisfied, because this system allows them to live more or less a decent life. Nobody looks into these trifles. The work that the parties should do is to explain the other ways of societal development; not just criticizing the authorities.
The previous elections demonstrated that despite anything the society backs the policy of the current head of the state. Bright people (within the opposition) should apparently have reviewed their strategies in how to work with the electorate.
ERB: They keep saying that they work, e.g. doing door-to-door things…
Martsev: They just say that they work with the electorate. But they are few and not resourceful enough to be able to knock on every door. On the other hand, if they formulated a correct strategy, they could have possible received access to the mass media. Just tell me why the European March was allowed? It was a positive idea of the politically active part of citizens who look at it as an alternative way of Belarus’s development. The government permitted the action, because it was positive. Clearly, the authorities ban all the actions directed against them.
ERB: The opposition has formulated its goal: we want to live like in Europe! Is it a wrong formula?
Martsev: That’s what I am saying. Not all of the opposition formulates it in this way. As soon as we pose ideological questions, it turns out that the opposition is not united. Part of the opposition wants to live like in Europe; another part wants to live like in Russia. Yet another part of the opposition says that we are like a small Switzerland. Thus, we do not discuss correct or wrong methods of the country’s development. Rather, we discuss different views on this development. It’s a very interesting moment for the society, because choosing a social way means one development model. Choosing the European way means a totally different variant of the political model.
ERB: Are we arriving at the conclusion that the opposition is getting united to no purpose?
Marstev: When we talk about the unification, we always talk about the unification of efforts, about the coordination of actions, about a certain plan. We have never proposed to anyone to merge into one organization titled “opposition”, which is the only correct one. The opposition differs, and people want to see that and support different people instead of supporting each and everyone separately. They want to have a choice. But the opposition always offers a single alternative: either a single candidate from all or a single candidate from a certain group…
ERB: Perhaps, our opposition lacks resources…
Martsev: The so called problem of resources is the problem of support. When your ideas are close to people, you will find money and resources; you will attract people and businesses. But when you say: “I want to be a president instead of this president”, everyone wants to know why it is you. The problem is that apart from formulating (your stance), you have to be worth trusting and to be able to show your worth.
ERB: The opposition says that you are worth when you can take as much people as possible to the streets. If it is not so, what is it, then?
Marstev: You are worthy when a lot of people come to support your ideas and your plans for the future. It’s not when only a group of your own activists come out to support you. You need people who support this idea. Has this idea been formulated? No! This idea titled “Down with Lukashenka!” has failed to attract anyone.
ERB: Does the authority necessarily have to undergo the stage of the opposition? For example, did the current authority pass the stage of the opposition back in 1994?
Marstev: When the opposition is integrated into the political system of power for a long time, it performs the function of power succession and policy adjustment. When the opposition comes from the street, in most cases through a revolution, radical changes take place. Sometimes, it is good; sometimes, it is bad. I would say that the opposition has not come to power in Belarus yet. Positioning Lukashenka as an opposition candidate (back in 1994) was a political technology, a PR-technology.
The opposition could have come to power in 1996-1997, when this political regime did not seem so solid and this leader did not seem to be a sole winner. Many people of the opposition wanted to gain power, but they were defeated. Another thing is that a politician is an animal in the good sense of this word. In other words, a politician is someone who lives by intuition. Why do you need to try breaking through the same doors? You need to keep changing your image.
ERB: Would a couple of good managers have resolved all these issues?
Marstev: But you have to be smart in order to hire those managers. Today, (opposition leaders) are PR managers, fighters, politicians themselves.
ERB: But these people have occupied the niche of the opposition, preventing anyone from entering this niche.
Marstev: Unfortunately, it demonstrates their brains. They don’t have enough brains to realize that the political system could be different in 5-10 years, when the power will not be limited to the president’s chair only. Power is a rather wide base in a civilized society. Only those like Lukashenka may wish to have it all like Lukashenka has done.
ERB: In many countries, a civil agreement exists between the government and the opposition. For example, the government does not harass the opposition, and the opposition doesn’t harass the former government after the change of power. Is such a deal possible in Belarus? Can the conditions that were once violated ever be restored?
Marstev: Firstly, these conditions were not created. Secondly, if these conditions are not created, this country will live for a long time. If the opposition and the government do not learn to come to an agreement and continue working for the destruction of each other, this country will not be able to exist for a long time. I understand that nobody will come to any agreement today. But they should move towards this agreement.
ERB: Can mediators help?
Martsev: Any attempt by the opposition to force the president to sitting at the negotiation table with them or to communicate through a Western mediator has been without future. The president is the president. If he sits at this table, he will show his weakness. The government cannot allow it. This psychology should be understood by the opposition who really wants to place the president at the negotiation table. Neither the president nor the top officials at the presidential administration will do this.
ERB: Let’s talks about upgrading the opposition or the changes within the opposition? Is it possible and on what conditions?
Martsev: Yes, I think so. This way or another, these processes are now taking place. One should not keep singing all the time that the opposition is intellectually disabled or obsessed with maniacal ideas of power. In the next five to seven years, Belarus will have to make a choice of development. The opposition will also take shape, depending on the choice of the development model by the country. Conditionally speaking, it will be either pro-Russian or pro-Western or pro-Belarusian.
But nobody should be crossed out of the political life. All of them are worthy people. It is very hard, both psychologically and physically, to keep resisting the state machine all these years. That’s why these people deserve respect. Let’s remember that most of them have passed through prison cells, arrests and persecution. They just need to be a little bit reanimated. One needs to explain to them that political struggle does not boil down to prison only. The society and the government must help them in this. This is s step which the government must make. The authorities need to stop political repressions and to reduce pressure on the opposition as much as possible. This is a minimum step which the government must make, if it doesn’t want to trample down everything around and destroy itself afterwards. Correspondingly, steps forward are needed.
ERB: Let’s talks about the external resources which the opposition is attracting. On the one hand, it is clear that the opposition cannot survive in another way. On the other hand, there is a lot of talk about the opposition working more abroad than inside the country. It means that it tends to attract resources rather than distribute them across Belarus or simply work inside the country. Don’t you think that these external resources often play a harmful role?
Marstev: Over these years, the opposition has indeed formed a significant group of people who live on wages. But if internal resources were available, politicians would also live on wages. Politicians always live on that. Please understand that funding as such is not bad. I am ready to prove that a serious funding is available in the official Belarusian politics. But it is not used very efficiently, either. The problem is not about funding. The problem is about the goals of this funding. Funding for elections? But there is no result. Afterwards, parasitizing begins. That’s what is bad.
If you want to ask whether the Western funding is ban, this is another issue. The government says that it is very bad. Perhaps, it is bad indeed, but the government, too receives foreign funding and does not feel ashamed about it. If the opposition could operate in normal conditions (this is about a civil agreement, a political system) the money would be available within the country. In fact, there would be even more money than the West is currently allocating. Although the West gives a lot of money, very little ends up here.
ERB: Is there a possibility that some new groups with their own political views are brewing in Belarus and could potentially play at the side of the opposition?
Marstev: Unfortunately, the authorities are not very bright, either. One cannot avoid it during the privatization processes. When you are unable or fear to lose control over the process, you need to spearhead this process. The government itself should be represented by these groups if it doesn’t want to lose control. It is a more complex game. It is rather more complicated than singing a paper, and everybody obeys. Moreover, it means a different political system. When they say that nothing is taking place in Belarus, it is not true. Nothing is taking place on the Belarusian television screens.
ERB: The president said several times that he was in need of a constructive opposition. Does he mean a certain formula of his own?
Martsev: The president is undoubtedly a sincere person. In principle, he is sincere. When he speaks without a paper, he says what he thinks. He definitely lacks the presence of a constructive opposition. But I don’t think that he indeed feels the lack of any constructive criticism and waits for someone to tell him from a TV screen: “You are wrong”, etc. No, I don’t think so.
The president has recently started feeling a deficit of proposals from his aides. However, the president needs advises. He doesn’t need opposition. The paradox is that he will not receive political advices from the aides that work for him. His aides cannot give him advices apart from those that comply with the state policy formulated by him. It is like a death sentence. If an official proposes something alternative to him, this official will be removed.
I am talking about the president’s readiness for a different political model when the opposition will be represented in the parliament and will lobby their legislation and blocking his laws at the same time. He is not ready for that.
ERB: Does the government need a certain counterbalance or fresh views at the moment?
Martsev: Yes. Actually, we think as badly about the government as it thinks about the opposition. There is a lot of talented people working inside the ministries who understand everything very well and can formulate their actions. But the system does not allow them to do so. They can’t; they don’t have the right. Tonight, we are talking all the time about the wrong opposition. There is a more significant and more influential opposition, but it is not structured. This opposition is within the government.
ERB: They will fear calling themselves opposition…
Marstev: In the political sense of the word, this is definitely not the opposition. We have gone deeper in our discussion, because we described even the media and everyone how disagrees as the opposition. They are the people who know and see much more. They have their own views on the development of the country. They do it better than the radical opposition, because they possess information, knowledge and experience. But this system does not give them an opportunity to express their discontent. They don’t know how to say that the gas costs need to be negotiated in February, not in July. They try to find a possibility to say, but the system puts brakes on them.
ERB: We talked about the mediators between the government and the opposition. Can the government use the opposition as a mediator in relations with Europe, Russia and other neighbors? It would be very convenient to use the opposition as a mediator in order to legalize it and engage in a dialogue…
Marstev: It could be an option. Indeed, there would be no better mediators for negotiations with the West than our people who are received there. Government always uses opposition just like the opposition uses the government. Politicians use and destroy each other in principle. But before working in this way, one would need to install game rules. We said earlier that there are very simple things that need to be done, leaving “non-agreeable” alone for a while.
ERB: What about 12 proposals of the European Union?
Marstev: 12 conditions of the EU are 12 conditions of the EU. This is what the European Union wants to see as a result. Any adequate person understands that time is needed in order to meet these 12 conditions. But one should being implementing them, not because this is a demand from the European Union but because this is in line with our own interests. I can observe some signs of negotiations, but they are rather small, chaotic and unorganized. Apparently, both the opposition and the government do not understand that they will have to sit down and talk together very soon. They don’t want to do it so much, because they treat the process of negotiations as weakness.
When Education Minister Radzkou says that he is ready to talk to the opposition, he is told: “Who are you?” I don’t know what the government planned when they found the Belaya Rus national association, but it can use this party as a tool for negotiations.
ERB: I understand that it is even more difficult to force the opposition to believe in the negotiation process than to force the government to believe in the same…
Marstev: Yes, indeed. When we talk about the opposition, I feel that you mean a certain group of people. We even know their names. But the opposition doesn’t boils down to those five or ten people…
ERB: I am talking about these people, because the society associates them with the opposition.
Martsev: Just like Lukashenka, these people will not sit at the negotiation table if there is no Lukashenka or Natallya Pyatkevich in front of them.
ERB: Or when another opposition structure is created in order to replace them.
Marstev: I think that the government is going to wait a little bit and will then create an opposition structure. The doors are already open, and the carpet is down. But they still try to get there through a window. They act as if they don’t understand signs…But the government, too, does not seem to understand signs. Both the government and the opposition do not want to study each other.
Photo: http://photo.bymedia.net
