Uladzimir Matskevich: Call for Ploshcha-2015 can only come from marginal actors

Now Belarus experiences hard economic situation; however, it is not as hard so as to expect mass radical protests.

Institute for Political Research “Political sphere” has published a research, where it forecasts the growth of social and political protests in 2015. The researchers prove such conclusion with two factors: worsening of the social and economic situation in Belarus and approach of the president campaign.

Should we link changes in Belarus with street protest activity of people? How mass and radical can the protests be? Is there an alternative to the Belarusan Ploshcha?

Uladzimir Matskevich, the head of the Board of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus “, answers the questions of “EuroBelarus” Information Service.

- Institute for Political Research “Political sphere” forecasts growth of political and social protests for 2015. We observe activation of democratic part of population during all national political campaigns. What forms and scales can mass protests take this year?

- I would refrain from such kind of forecasts. Based on the ideas about elections, protests are quite hard to predict. Usually they are linked to the sharp decline of social, economic, and political situation in the country. If the worsening is happening slowly, both the authorities and the population adapt to the worsening.

If we are considering organized protests, today basically no people from the opposition can take upon themselves organization of mass protests.

- Protest activity of society (social, and all the more political) is little. Why do we need protests that bring no effect?

- Let’s try to understand.

A question about the reason of having protests is an ill-posed one. Protests signal that there is something wrong in the country, that the society is dissatisfied, and people demand changes. Protests for the protests’ sake are a form of deviation.

If the upper strata aren’t going to introduce changes, the lower classes feel the need to urge the upper strata to do so. And then the protests appear – as a signal to the need of change and as a consequence of dull government.

- The project “Ploshcha” that presupposes the change of the political regime through mass protest actions in case of falsifications at the elections has lost its urgency after December 19, 2010 and was finally buried by the Russia-Ukraine war. It means that Lukashenka isn’t facing people’s resignation, is he?

- I categorically disagree with the assessment that says that the protests have lost their urgency after December 19, 2010. During the latest president campaign protests were cruelly and bloodily suppressed; after that Lukashenka made it clear more than once that he won’t allow new protests or disturbances. Protests cannot lose their urgency is there is economic and political need in them.

I also think that protests in Belarus and in Ukraine are incomparable and incommensurable. Ukraine’s Maidan is a vivid example of constructive protests that led to discharge of the completely rotten regime of Yanukovich and to legitimate change of power. Ukrainian people were driven to this condition: overall corruption, poverty, colossal gap between the rich and the poor. There is no such gap in Belarus, and that’s where incomparability of causes and scales of protests in our country and in Ukraine comes from.

- With the loss of “Ploshcha” project opposition lost its only strategy that it was propagating during the last political campaigns. There is no hope that masses will ruin dictatorship. What’s in exchange then?

- In 2006 no one urged people to come to Ploshcha and no one was counting on “Ploshcha” as a means to help opposition get power through revocation of falsified elections. The opposition wasn’t ready for the Ploshcha, though we already had the experience of Ukrainian Maidan 2004. And that was the mistake made by Ploshcha – back then they could count on Ploshcha’s success.

Non-readiness of opposition to mass protests in 2006 was an impulse to defining “Ploshcha” as strategic task in 2010. It was stupid, as opposition had poor preparations to mass protests, while the authorities came to be more ready for it. And even though provocation with disorders failed, the authorities used all the repression mechanism to get rid of any dissidence at the political field and to threaten people.

Since 2006 the opposition didn’t become stronger, didn’t become more in terms of membership, although there were all conditions for that: repressions after December 19, 2010, the crisis of 2011, worsening of economic situation of 2014-2015.

In terms of organization, opposition has become even weaker; there are almost no leaders able to organize broad public movement left. That is why now, on the eve of the president campaign 2015, it is irresponsible to put such aims as organization of mass protests. Such calls can only come from marginal and minor actors.

- People are afraid to change political power by means of mass protests. Lukashenka’s regime won’t give power back, which means that Belarusans have to suffer from now on, hoping for the grace of God, haven’t they?

- if the protests appear spontaneously, it means that no one was preparing for them. Spontaneous protests appear due to steep decline in social, economic, and political situation. Now Belarus is undergoing tough economic situation, but not that tough to expect mass radical protests.

Of course, mass dismissals at MAZ, break of a number of Belarusan enterprises, regime’s readiness to allow mass unemployment – all that can bring negative reaction from people to authorities’ actions, though not extremely negative, as the situation in the country is not extremely hard yet.

What people are protesting against is only one part of mass protests. The second is what are they ready to fight for, what are the positive suggestions, ideas?

Opposition has no political leaders that people can follow; it has no ideas, suggestions, for which people are ready to risk. There are now extraordinary reasons to protest: no overall corruption, no general poverty, no high unemployment that are ready to cause extremely negative reaction of people towards the authorities.

Absence of positive ideas and suggestions that would be clear to the majority, accessible and spread through mass media mean that we shouldn’t expect demonstrations of mass activity.

What should we hope for? We need to raise attractive leaders in the opposition, we should elaborate positive program and don’t regard radical methods of struggle as of paramount importance. In this situation we can only hope for the evolutionary way – a dialog, communication with the authorities. As the authorities have been unable to cope with the challenges the time and epoch has been setting in front of them in the 90s and with the new challenges set by the new millennium. The authorities react and adjust to the challenges of the changing situation and the changing world.

However, if there will be no power that would be able to adopt modern challenges more successfully than the authorities, we have to hope for a dialog at least on local and particular problems.