Belarusian society must use opportunity to change system

Belarusian well-known journalist Andrei Dynko writes about possible change of power in Belarus.

Russia applies the Kyrgyz scenario to Belarus, which led to throwing off Bakiyev.

Economic pressure replaced sweet promises and an information storm has begun. Following NTV, Russian Channel One and Russia Channel came down on Lukashenka. Not all guns have been used yet, but some of the shells have already reached Belarus. Lukashenka’s censorship confiscated “Nasha Niva” print run, but didn’t cut a story from newscast where the head of state was accused of killings. The idea that Lukashenka is a political chameleon whose time is over runs like a golden thread through all stories. Belarus needs to change the leader to have good relations with Russia.

The name of a possible candidate is not said.

The Kyrgyz scenario provided for further economic freezing ahead of the elections and manipulation through the media.

The Kyrgyz opposition prepared to change the power the country’s regions. People’s meetings were held there. Later, this resulted in a national rally in Bishkek. It should be reminded that the Russian TV took the side of streets in Kyrgyzstan.

But Lukashenka will also learn the experience of Bakiyev. The latter didn’t cut off Russian TV and press, so Bishkek was receiving information from Moscow at the crucial moment.

Moscow turns to the KGB. The NTV film stresses the secret services fear Lukashenka, but do not respect him. The KGB has forces ready to support the opposition.

The Kremlin plays along with the opposition. It started when Belarusian independent press editors were invited to Medvedev. Now, the Russian TV gives the floor to the people put on the black lists in Belarus.

Being good for strengthening political pluralism can this support pose an implicit threat to independence?

What does Russia want to get? Preserving a status quo in relations with Belarus with decreasing the volume of energy grants.

Does Moscow have power enough to implement the same scenario it used in poor Asian Kyrgyzstan in a European rather well-off country?

A scenario of West-supported peaceful revolutions was implemented in Serbia, Slovakia, Croatia, Ukraine, but failed in Belarus due to its lack of political independence. Moscow may play along with the opposition, as Pavel Sheremet states, play along with Lukashenka’s strongest opponent whoever it may be with a hope that a new leader will all the same return the system to the previous position. However, Russia stands ready only to playing along, it is up to the Belarusians themselves to a course.

By the way, the result of the changes in Kyrgyzstan remains unclear so far. The country has survived through some month of instability. Its geopolitical orientation is still in question. But his is Asia. If there are changes in Belarus, they are likely to be organized under Central European scenario.

In any case, the Belarusian society will express its opinion in streets.

Similar to 2006, a decision will be taken on Square in 2011. In 2006, there were not enough forces to change the system, but a strong blow was delivered that took much time for Lukashenka to recover. Unprecedented sacrifice of the youth in struggling for freedom opened a new Belarus for the world.

If 2011 brings any changes in the system, they will be made under the flags prevailing in streets. If there are more national white-red-white flags, we’ll see white-red-white changes.

Democratic rules in a political game don’t appear on a desire of a do-gooder. Democracy appears when political players do not have enough power to eliminate one another or when foreign threats are more dangerous than internal ones and require democratic mobilization or support of the democratic world to counter them. In this sense, the weaker Lukashenka is, the more chances democracy has.

Will democracy bring more opportunities to make the nation stronger?

Supporters of Lukashenka claim only authoritarian rule protects the country from Russia’s intervention, from a kind of turmoil organized by Moscow in the 18th century, from economic dependence. They say incredibly rich Moscow will be able to manipulate Belarusian politicians and public opinion as soon as Lukashenka relaxes his grip. Examples of Ukraine, Moldova, and Estonia prove weakness of the argument.

Yes, Belarus is more russified than Ukraine. But it is more homogeneous and less corrupted. Under democracy, Belarus has more chances to follow the Scandinavian-Baltic model.

Let’s remember that the authoritarian rule replaced the national flag and eliminated the language. Democracy will mean releasing the Belarusian culture.

Moscow shouldn’t be invited as an arbitrator in Belarusian domestic affairs. But the Belarusian society should use this new situation to change the system. In any case, it’s high time for the Belarusian society to apply pressure on the authorities in all areas: policy, economy, workers’ rights, language, and freedom of the national media.

Supporting dictatorship would be a mistake at least because it speculates on independence.