The last few days have been full of messages about Belarus. Lukashenko spoke sharply about the Russian Federation, the government changed in Belarus, then the Belarusian president again went through "Russian neighbors". In short, there are many events that can not be expected.
To admit, I thought at first to write a more or less serious text with a detailed explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of the appointees. But the very first questions of journalists, readers of my tape in the FB, puzzled. As for you, for example, about such a passage: "Should we expect democratization in Belarus. Or, perhaps, the fact that Minsk will declare about "alliance" with Kiev?.
Gentlemen, stop perceiving the world in the tones of "zrada-peremoga".
Yes, in the government (if you want - the new government) of the neighboring country, the positions of the supporters of the liberal economy strengthened. Key posts occupied non-trivial people. And, yes, these people, among other things, are very skeptical about the "Russian vector" of cooperation.
In the end, Lukashenka feels the mood of the population (or their changes) and against the background of skepticism about the "brotherly people" is expressed more and more sharply. But can there be a question of changing the vector? Let's see - why can not.
BRAIN? WAIT FOR DEMOCRATIZATION?.
Get out, dear. A liberal market economy can exist without democracy, but democracy without a liberal economy is difficult. The example of Singapore, Turkey, South Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, the same China to help you.
That is, further liberalization of the economy, the creation of preferential terms for key industries, even the sale of agricultural enterprises is very, very possible. But democratization is not.
A similar situation with national symbols, playing with national traditions. It so happened that if in the late 1990s Lukashenka, as Pavel Kazarin aptly noted, was "dyed through the whole of Belarus", today he very carefully tries to weave the national myth into the basis of his ideology. Just in the 90's he wanted to become a "Russian Tsar". In 00 I realized that the train had left.
Over the past seven years, he has clearly realized that the independence of Belarus is equal to the guarantees of his own power, his money, his life. That is, he is trying to protect himself - in the first place. National values ??are needed only to show the population of the country and neighbors from the east "you (Russians) did not stand here".
Nationalism (both healthy and extreme) can perfectly exist in an authoritarian regime. Therefore, yes, for national symbols are no longer planted, it is de facto recognized. BUT this does not mean that there is a democratization. Confusion in the perception of these processes is one of the main errors of external observers and part of the Belarusian political elite.
SO CAN BELARUS BE DEVELOPED TO THE EUROPEAN PARTY?.
Now about foreign policy orientation. Belarus will not rush into a pick and get on the banner of the "EU-RF". Why? What for? In the case of pedaling processes and early access to the level of open escalation, who will be on the side of official Minsk? The EU will stand up for "the last dictator of Europe?" The EU has strongly supported the Crimea in practical actions? For the Donbass? So with what fright his reaction to possible problems in Belarus should be more harsh? !! Correctly, such will not be.
A "sympathy" and concern in case of real problems - that the dead poultice. Kiev? With all due respect, but Ukraine's resources are barely enough to ensure its own existence. And repainting a couple of thousand avatars in a white-red-white color or a couple hundred bouquets near the embassy is, of course, nice, but in case of real problems this is not about anything.
The mood of the population? Indeed, the last 20 years the population of Belarus has been divided conditionally into supporters of European integration and supporters of rapprochement with the Russian Federation. But the events in Ukraine did their job. "Decisive" Europe's policy against the backdrop of frank schizophrenia in the Kremlin has increased the number of those who consider it unnecessary to come close to either those or those. That is, "to be friends and trade" - yes, to declare about the "development vector" - yes they went "far and the forest".
Thus, while there is an opportunity to balance - Belarus will try to receive bonuses from both sides. Better still, from three. Minsk tries to incorporate into the equation at least one more center of gravity. Agree, standing on the twine is not too convenient. But to have three potential support points is already more stable. That is why Minsk has been dragging Chinese money and Chinese business into the country for the past eight years. More precisely, it is not just business that is drawn, but state (preferably military) corporations.
Larchik opens simply: the PRC never defends private Chinese companies, but ALWAYS reacts abruptly to attempts to cross the road to state corporations. At the same time, Beijing absolutely does not care about the degree of democratization of the regime in the country of their interests. It is extremely important for Lukashenka to attract a "critical mass" of Chinese state money. China is not interested in "Belarus in isolation", so Minsk will carry out economic reforms and draw closer to Europe. But for the same reason, he will not make unnecessary trade (and other) wars with the Russian Federation. By the way, the deterioration of relations with Ukraine, too, will not please the Chinese partners. Although, in the latter case, Belarus has a dominant pragmatic interest in the Ukrainian direction.
And how about the "alliance" of Ukraine?.
Belarus will become an "ally" of Ukraine? Lukashenko is not anyone's ally. There are his interests, there are interests of preserving power. There are also objective interests of the country. For today they coincide - Ukraine is an extremely important partner, the failure of which means the onset of problems in Belarus. Simply put, while the Kremlin is busy trying to get Kiev back into its orbit, Minsk is gradually untying the nodules that "Russian friends" have tried or already tied to it. The failure of Ukraine will lead to the desire of the Russian Federation to solve in one fell swoop the "Belarusian problem".
The second aspect is the Ukrainian market, which, on the one hand, is an alternative to the Russian, on the other hand, a possible springboard for entering the markets of third countries, regardless of the sanctions regimes for Belarus (here it is a banal smuggling, which in recent years appeared a lot).
Ukraine is important and profitable, but Ukraine is not an ally, since Belarus is not going to impose its "allied" obligations. As, incidentally, the EU countries - after all, there is not a single treaty where their "allied status" would have been fixed, where the compulsory actions of European states to fulfill their allied duty. Belarus is interested in simple countable things - benefits, opportunities. And the fact that Ukraine is "profitable" is a greater guarantee than hundreds of signed pieces of paper and loud words that are applauded by crowds on the streets. Therefore, even here it is not necessary to expect sharp changes.
On the other hand, if one understands Lukashenka's motivation, the motivation of the Belarusian elites (political, business groups) - one can play and tie Belarus to the opportunities of joint earnings in the future, joint prospects, if only they are measurable and achievable. The benefit, the joint receipt of profits (economic and political) brings together. And there, you see, and before the discussion of more serious things, the hands will reach. For this it is necessary a little: Belarus answered the question "why do we need Ukraine," Ukraine also needs to formulate "why should Belarus". When there are interests, there are points of their contact and there is work. Otherwise, there is a lot of empty (but damn beautiful) politicians' crowds and very few actual cases.
Join also the TSN group. Blogs on facebook and follow the updates of the section!.