Democracy in Exile

Many have called the Freedom Day rally that took place in Minsk on March 25 a rehearsal for a revolution. As usual, for the most part it was a rehearsal for the riot squads, who charged at the protesters with batons and carted them away in police wagons. Aside from protest rallies, however, the Belarusian opposition must also prepare to challenge Aleksandr Lukashenko in the elections, no matter how hopeless this undertaking may seem. Of all places, the Belarusian opposition is eyeing Kyiv a suitable venue for its primaries.

THE ART OF THE POSSIBLE

The joint opposition forces expect to elect their single candidate at a congress of Belarusian democratic forces. As The Day learned from Sergey Alfer, deputy chairman of the United Civic Party, today all Belarusian democrats are united in their desire to hold primaries in their homeland. “If we fail to secure a venue [for the congress], we are ready to follow underground routes to places that our enemies can’t access. Another option is to hold the main part of the congress and the primaries in Belarus, and the second, so to speak, ceremonial part abroad. Electing a single candidate in a different country is an emergency option, which has not been considered yet,” Alfer said.

Over the years the Belarusian government has developed many technologies for restricting the freedom of assembly of its people. For example, when delegates prepare to meet at a rented hall, their gatherings are often disrupted by a bomb scare. This past winter the Belarusian opposition was prevented from holding a congress of former nominees for the lower house of parliament when hall-rental contract was cancelled one day before the event. Eventually, it was held in February in the Ukrainian city of Chernihiv.

“If we are forced to hold the congress outside Belarus, when we get around to selecting among the four neighboring countries, we will primarily be taking into account the level of public interest it would generate in each country,” says Alfer. “Today Poland is largely oriented toward Europe and has little regard for Belarus, for which reason public interest and press coverage would be insignificant there. In Russia we would receive strong backing from the media only if President Putin attended our congress with his congratulations. But, first, this will never happen and, second, some of our politicians would not like the idea of traveling to Russia for their primaries. This leaves us Lithuania and Ukraine. The Belarusian opposition maintains good relations with the ruling political elites of Lithuania and Ukraine. And this event would undoubtedly generate significant public interest there.”

In 1989 Vilnius hosted the founding congress of the Belarusian Popular Front. However, according to Eurasian Heritage foundation expert Aleksandr Semchenko, today Ukraine is a better option for the Belarusian opposition, primarily because of the charisma of the Orange Revolution. Second, Belarusians don’t need visas to travel to Ukraine, and it is probably cheaper to rent a hall in Kyiv than in Vilnius. As a noted representative of Lithuania’s scholarly community told The Day , the Lithuanians will not be offended “if the choice falls on Ukraine. This will be better for Lithuania’s national interests.”

Of course, it is also a complex issue for the Ukrainian leadership. Answering a question in Davos about the possible export of the revolution to Belarus, President Yushchenko said that “the Ukrainians’ experience of defending their rights may prove useful for any country where human rights have been trampled on.” Speaking later in Strasbourg, the Ukrainian president said that the prospects of bilateral political and economic relations “are gravely complicated by the current leadership in Minsk.” But President Yushchenko has also said that political differences should not stand in the way of good neighborly relations. In early March Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Borys Tarasiuk declared that “international and neighborly relations, which should continue in the future, are one thing, while the plight of democracy in Belarus is a completely different thing.” “This raises concerns in the OSCE, European Council, and the EU. And new democratic Ukraine clearly shares this position. Before coming to power we had a close relationship with the Belarusian opposition. We will continue to maintain such relations in the future,” Minister Tarasiuk said in an interview with the Kyiv Weekly. At the same time, according to The Day’s sources in Belarus, during his recent trip to Minsk Borys Tarasiuk did not meet with local opposition leaders, which upset them. Therefore, it is very likely that top Ukrainian executives will not openly support the Belarusians’ away congress. This decision will fall to “orange” lawmakers in parliament. There is also the possibility that the congress will be held not in Kyiv but a different Ukrainian city. A Belarusian congress has already taken place in Chernihiv. “If it proves impossible to hold the congress in the capital, or if it can be organized more effectively elsewhere but with an equal informational impact, that would suit us just fine,” says Sergey Alfer. “If necessary, we will discuss options that will satisfy us and be convenient for the leadership of the host country.”

The United Civil Party’s deputy chairman was diplomatic in his comment on Borys Tarasiuk’s visit to Minsk. “After coming to power, oppositionists begin to reconsider their words and actions. Perhaps Tarasiuk decided that in this situation it would be more appropriate not to meet with opposition representatives. We have a good and longstanding relationship with the greater part of Ukraine’s ruling political elite. I believe that in the nearest future the Ukrainian leaders will not change their position on human rights and freedoms. As for tactical issues, every country has the right to independently choose ways to resolve these problems. We should not over-dramatize the situation every time some meeting doesn’t take place. Politics is the art of the possible. We welcome joint efforts with the Ukrainian political elite in defending human rights and freedoms,” Alfer said.

NO UNITY IN THE OPPOSITION CAMP

There is as much uncertainty about the venue of the Belarusian democratic congress as there is about the forecasts of the congress’s results. According to Sergey Alfer, there is an almost “closed list” of nominees for the single candidate from the united democratic opposition. It includes four hopefuls of the leading political parties: United Civil Party chairman Anatoly Lebedko, Belarusian Communist Party leader Sergey Kaliakin, independent Aleksandr Milinkevych, who has been nominated by the Green Party and the Belarusian Popular Front, and Social-Democratic Party “Hramada” leader Stanislav Shushkevich. There are others who wish to run for president. Alfer expects more than ten people to be nominated. “Only those who manage to collect at least 100,000 authentic signatures in support of their candidacy stand a real chance of success. And signatures are verified here more painstakingly than anywhere else. The electoral resources in Belarusian society will suffice for no more than two teams. No more than two persons are entitled to collect signatures and organize an effective team to undertake very complex work throughout Belarus. Therefore, the next elections will be a confrontation between Lukashenko and the single nominee from the democratic forces. I’m certain that Lukashenko cannot muster over 50% of the public vote. The people have simply grown tired of him,” Alfer said.

One of the strongest challengers vying to become the single opposition candidate is United Civic Party leader Anatoly Lebedko. Well known in Ukraine, he visited Ukraine on a number of occasions, during the Orange Revolution and in its wake. He also received a special invitation to attend Viktor Yushchenko’s inauguration. According to The Day’s sources, Anatoly Lebedko proposed the idea of holding primaries among the opposition forces.

Oleksandr Milinkevych, leader of a Hrodno-based civic organization, is viewed as a reincarnation of Semen Domash, the Belarusian Popular Front’s nominee in the 2001 elections. The Green Party, which supports him together with the Belarusian Popular Front, is too weak even by the standards of the Belarusian political system. The idea of nominating the former Belarusian parliamentary speaker, Stanislav Shushkevych, brings to mind the situation that existed in Ukraine one year ago. Then rumors were circulating about the possible nomination of Leonid Kravchuk for president. Many Belarusians view Shushkevych as part of the group that was behind the collapse of the USSR. Moreover, even though he is experienced, he is already past middle age. Among the other possible nominees are former People’s Deputy Valery Frolov, leader of the Respublika Group, trade unionist Aleksandr Yaroshuk, and disgraced former rector of the Belarusian State University Aleksandr Kozulin. The latter would make a very convenient opponent for Lukashenko: the suspended criminal case against Kozulin opened in connection with his alleged financial violations while he occupied the rector’s seat can easily be reopened and used as a blackmail tool.

According to independent Belarusian sociologists, many people are displeased with Lukashenko, but they are in no hurry to side with his political opponents. Oppositionists have virtually no channels for communication with the nation. So far the biggest hope of the “Belarus without Lukashenko” movement is the recognition of the illegitimate nature of Lukashenko’s participation in the 2006 elections. Whereas until recently sociologists admitted that Lukashenko could win the elections even without artificially inflated percentage points, now they are saying that the results of last year’s referendum that amended the Constitution were clearly fabricated. According to the Baltic division of the Gallup Institute, less than 49% of voters agreed to grant Lukashenko the right to run for a third term, while the official tally was well over 77%. Therefore, the result of the 2006 elections will depend on a combination of several factors: Belarusians who voted against Father Lukashenko III, the conduct of the local administrative resource, and the strategy pursued by external forces.

Meanwhile, on April 3 Gomel hosted a regional conference to select candidates for the informational and propaganda campaign designed to nominate a single presidential hopeful. However, the conference unexpectedly turned into a procedure for electing a single candidate, in which Aleksandr Milinkevych received 48 votes, Anatoly Lebedko 34 votes, Sergey Kaliakin 30 votes, and Stanislav Shushkevych 6 votes. The opposition had not planned regional primaries. Anatoly Lebedko said that in any case he has a “pass to the congress,” for which reason “attendance at regional conferences is not mandatory in my schedule.” The United Civic Party leader expressed his regret over the loss of “team spirit,” while those who do not have much faith in the consolidation of the Belarusian opposition forces have received further proof to support their skepticism.