Political analyst Andrei Kazakevich: “The authorities are not afraid of new protests”

The Belarusian authorities fear new electoral campaigns.

It was precisely for this purpose that a single voting day was introduced, moving elections to local councils of deputies one year forward.

At the same time, an intention has been announced to hold a referendum on amending the Constitution in February 2022.

What is the reason for this contradiction, and are the authorities afraid of new mass protests?

Political analyst and director of the Political Sphere Institute Andrei Kazakevich answered EX-PRESS.BY’s questions (https://ex-press.by/rubrics/novosti-borisova/2021/11/03/politolog-andrej-kazakevich-novyx-protestov-vlast-ne-boitsya).
“There is no contradiction here, because the commitments and plans to hold a referendum were announced back in autumn 2020,” he says. “On the one hand, it was initially considered one of the mechanisms for resolving the political crisis in Belarus.

On the other hand, this scenario was promoted by Moscow.

The details of the agreements between official Minsk and the Kremlin on this matter are unknown.

But one way or another, the authorities decided that it was necessary to begin constitutional reform and reform the political system.

Holding the referendum and the subsequent political reform was simplified by postponing the elections, so as not to complicate this political campaign with an electoral campaign for local councils.

Therefore, the decision itself is quite logical.

The authorities are not afraid of new protests.

After the events of 2020, very harsh repression was applied against various sectors of society and in various regions.

The regime now understands how to deal with unrest if it arises.

Therefore, the main challenge for the authorities will be ensuring the legitimacy of the vote and its results, since it cannot be ruled out that the referendum will be sabotaged and will not produce the “necessary” results or resolve the political crisis.

The current structure of power in Belarus has existed without major changes for almost two decades.

It is clear that the need for its reform is long overdue.

Can innovations in the Constitution of Belarus lead to tectonic shifts within the state apparatus and the political system as a whole?
“In principle, they can.

Of course, not immediately, but in the longer term.

The problem is relevant for a system such as the Belarusian one, which really has not changed at all since 1996, that is, for a quarter of a century.

Therefore, any changes, any redistribution of powers, are serious risks for it.

Everything is further complicated by the fact that within the authorities themselves the level of trust between different agencies, between different politicians, and Lukashenka’s level of trust toward his entourage are not very high, which creates additional risks.

Ultimately, Belarus simply has no experience of alternative domestic political life, no experience of redistributing and delegating powers from one body to another, and no experience of such a complex political game.

Both officials and Lukashenka himself understand all this poorly, so any such reform is, to a large extent, a move into the unknown.

Does the top leadership have a vision of the country’s strategic direction, or is everything subordinated to the desire of the Lukashenka family to preserve its power?
“Rather, the latter.

There is no strategic vision of the country’s future; it is not recorded anywhere.

As soon as it begins to be discussed in any form, as soon as any discussions begin, they are immediately suppressed.

Lukashenka himself also has no clear and coherent vision of the direction of development.

This can be understood by analyzing his public speeches, in which arguments run like a thread that he wants and must stay, that he does not see himself outside the political system.

Therefore, there is clearly a problem of the Belarusian dead end: the existing political model cannot provide a strategic vision of the future, but at the same time it also cannot find a new place for Lukashenka in the event of a transfer of power.

Austria has announced its intention to hold an international conference on Belarus on November 22.

Did this initiative come as a surprise to the regime, and how should it be assessed: as an attempt to establish dialogue with the dictator or as an attempt to force him to sit down at the negotiating table?
“The discussion that such a meeting was necessary, about its format and venue, had been going on for a long time, so I do not think it came as a surprise to the regime.

Austria is a traditional neutral platform for dialogue between various political forces.

It is hardly worth thinking that the conference will resolve Belarus’s domestic political crisis, and it is even less worth thinking that this is about forcing official Minsk to negotiate.

Probably the most that can be expected from the conference is the beginning of a cautious dialogue between the different sides of the conflict.

Perhaps not even direct dialogue and not within one auditorium or one meeting.

But whether anything will happen in this regard will become clear closer to the event.

For now, it is obvious that the authorities are not showing flexibility on the issue of negotiations, especially if we are talking about the participation of their opponents.

That is, the authorities are generally not against dialogue with Europe, at least on a number of issues, but they see it only in the format of “official Minsk — European structures.”

The authorities do not want to allow the opposition into negotiations, even at the expert level, and will sabotage such initiatives as much as possible.