Uladzimir Matskevich: To negotiate with the authorities one should equal it in power

What is the European dialogue on Modernization? What are the hindrances for the realization of the program? And at what stage is the dialogue with the current Belarusian regime possible?

Uladzimir Matskevich, the head of the Rada of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, expressed his opinion on these questions:

-The Europeans have decided that if the regime is so persistent in its stubbornness and there is no hope for a dialogue in the near future, then they need to organize the European dialogue on modernization.

In Europe itself the dialogue is provided with meetings and highly expert round tables; Belarus is provided with similar resources. The Belarusans – the opposition parties, the civil society – are given a chance to make use of the resources which are allocated by the EU.

Dialogue as the process of talking

- Something should be done, not just declared! But the majority of the experts come to the conferences of the European dialogue on modernization unprepared:  they do not negotiate with their structures, they do not obtain democratic decisions neither inside their own parties nor with the parties they cooperate with, etc. They come to proclaim empty abstract slogans.

The Europeans have given us a chance. What is this chance about? They say: we give you certain resources to organize the dialogue and, in your turn, you should accept and mobilize it. But all the efforts to arrange the Belarusan side of the dialogue (namely the civil society and the experts of the political opposition) made by the National Platform of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum are hampered by the reluctance to consolidate.   

It turns out that either they are trying to implement their selfish corporate interests in the dialogue, or they work for the regime (which is generally improbable, but theoretically possible), or they are content with the current situation, content with the inactivity and sheer talking. Then we need to call these people by names.

Naïve people are also invited to the dialogue. Mostly they represent organizations of the lowest level which work with the population. They do not go deep into politics; they do not interfere with serious solutions.  Still, they are not called to account. But the experts from the first group of organizations (“Political Dialogue and Political Reform”) realize for sure that the European helping hand in form of the dialogue demands energetic actions from the Belarusan side.

Representation as a remedy for pluralism

-In order to involve into the dialogue those who are ready to act, not just talk, a mechanism of representation should exist. It means that people should be able to participate in the dialogue not because of their connections or some personal achievements, but because they are delegated by relatively large public and political authorities and because they are entrusted to carry out certain plans, to reach certain aims, to hold proper negotiations inside the dialogue, to coordinate and - if needed – to compromise and to make concessions. But they have to move forward, not stand still defending abstract ideas.

And except this mechanism of representation we do not have any other mechanisms of modern democracy. And it appears today that people who participate in the dialogue represent nobody but themselves. They do not have to give an account to anyone for their actions. And nobody can make them to. It is not a democracy without these factors, it is a stupid pluralism, when all the opinions are equal, nobody respect and nobody hears each other.

 The negotiations with the authorities are not on the doorstep yet

-The authorities today have their own interests and their own demands which cannot be considered logical. But the demands are clear: they want to preserve the power at any price. And to do so, you have to take total control over the power without sharing. The principles of democracy are the principles of the separation of powers and mutual delegation of rights, credentials, subsidization, etc. At the moment the authorities would not agree to this. We know that well.

That is why the only stage of negotiations when it will be possible to talk to the authorities and to listen to their arguments seriously is the stage when the Government, the President and the whole regime resign their commission. But this stage is not on the doorstep yet; we are to reach it first. And today all our moves towards the dialogue concern the strengthening of the civil society and the political opposition. We reinforce in order to equalize our powers so that to have enough strength to exert pressure on the regime.

Neither strength, nor will…

-The only argument we have in the negotiations with the authorities is strength, the strength of the civil society. If the authorities do not make concessions, we, for example, will go on general strike which will paralyze the regime in course of one day. Well, now we cannot afford that kind of strike, but we can paralyze other activities of the authorities.

At present Europe generally have the strength to press the regime, but they do not have the political will. Nor do we have strength neither will. If we had the will, it would mean that we only negotiate with the regime about the strip of power. But throughout the previous stages all our efforts were directed to accumulate the strength.

When I speak about the dialogue, I do not mean these naïve performances that still rule in the civil society organizations: “if we have a meeting with a Minister, everything will be good”.  Every word said by an official is not worth a dime, even if it is the Prime minister.  Why do we need to talk to them?

The dialogue is possible only between the equals.  And if we know everything about the modern authorities, then to become equal to them we must have the strength. We also have an excellent ally – Europe. If we have the strength, most of the European politicians, who now vote for the liberalization of the relations with the criminal regime, will take our side. Today they cannot do it because they do not see an alternative to the regime, though they care about the Belarusan people in their own way. They say: “Well, there is no choice! Thus we have to talk to Lukashenka, who else?” But if there is a power that resists Lukashenka, they will quickly change their position. Because they are real politicians, not talkers.