20. September 2020
https://sptnkne.ws/DGzA
The processes and events in Belarus are currently occupying many political analysts. Also our guest commentator Holger Michael. The historian assesses the events in Belarus without any ifs or buts as an attempt at overthrow desired and supported by the West. Which, however, was not successful.
The cause of the events in Belarus is the final implementation of the anti-Russian „geopolitical revolution“ by the EU, NATO and the USA with the aim of completing the military encirclement of Russia in order to exclude Moscow as a great power, to withdraw its raw materials from China and itself to make fully accessible. To do this, Belarus must be wrested from Russian influence and instead given to the EU, but above all to NATO. The aim is to overthrow the constitutional political and economic order authorized by referendums, i.e. a typical counter-revolution. As a consequence there would be a „cleansing“ of the power apparatus by replacing by incompetent „Zukurzgekommene“, a persecution of the left supporters of Lukashenko and friends of Russia, the already announced punishment („Tribunal“) of members of the security and protection organs, for unchecked privatization in industry and agriculture, for the elimination of social gains etc., ultimately to misery and chaos.
Russia would have to vacate its bases, while NATO would set up its missiles in the „front yard of Moscow“. There would be no more advance warning times to defend Russia, and Moscow would be open to blackmail without risking a war, thinks the EU, NATO and the USA.
Belarus was already a special case during the Soviet era
The „Partisan Republic“, which was completely destroyed during the Great Patriotic War, was extensively rebuilt and modernized, and achieved one of the highest standards of living in the USSR. Politically, it was considered the „most Soviet“ of the 15 republics of the USSR. There were hardly any nationalist movements of the kind that have always existed in the Ukraine and the Baltic States. It was the only Union republic to offer passive resistance to perestroika, and for a time it fought against the nationalist and other bourgeois „opposition“, which was developing mainly with Lithuanian help. Although the right had not been approved as an organization, they were allowed to run for the first time in 1990 with individual candidates. The communists received 86%, their opponents only 14%. A process that was unique in the former USSR.
In the referendum to preserve the USSR in March 1991, 83% of the electorate voted for the Soviet Union. That was higher than the average for the USSR (78%) and even the then Russian republic (73%). However, 33% in the Belarusian capital Minsk voted against it. This is where the Soviet enemies gathered, especially among the humanistic and artistic intelligentsia. Over the years, Minsk developed into the center of right-wing resistance. Since then, that is, since 1990, until today, every election result has been questioned and demonstrators have taken to the streets.
Belarus remained „special“ even after the collapse of the Soviet Union
In June 1991 the leadership began to pull away. The nationalists, founded in 1990 in Vilnius, Lithuania, were officially admitted. The right in parliament could now show 44%, which is why the nationalist Stanislau Schuschkewitsch came through as parliamentary president. After the failure of the „August Putsch“ in 1991, the Communist Party (KP) was suspended and complete independence was declared. The nationalists then called for new elections with half a million signatures. This was strictly rejected by the MPs, who had since officially left the Communist Party but still pursued socialist policies. Although the “blood flag” of the pro-German collaborators was decreed as the state flag and the Belarusian language as the only state language, this decision never came to fruition. Fundamental bourgeois reforms were always rejected or blocked by the socialist majority. Privatization only started in 1993, did not include any strategic operations and only 15%. Over 70% of industry and 87% of agriculture have remained state or cooperative to this day. The CP was admitted back in 1992 and has since formed the second largest group in parliament after the so-called independents (former CP members). In 1992 a new political and military alliance was concluded with Russia. The nationalists, who could only count on 12% of the population, had suffered a strategic defeat. Over 70% of industry and 87% of agriculture have remained state or cooperative to this day. The CP was admitted back in 1992 and has since formed the second largest group in parliament after the so-called independents (former CP members). In 1992 a new political and military alliance was concluded with Russia. The nationalists, who could only count on 12% of the population, had suffered a strategic defeat. Over 70% of industry and 87% of agriculture have remained state or cooperative to this day. The CP was admitted back in 1992 and has since formed the second largest group in parliament after the so-called independents (former CP members). In 1992 a new political and military alliance was concluded with Russia. The nationalists, who could only count on 12% of the population, had suffered a strategic defeat.
The beginning of the Lukashenko era
In the meantime, however, the economic situation had deteriorated drastically. Production fell by 30%. After three years, most Belarusians had had enough of “democracy”, which was perceived as chaos and impoverishment. The influence of the right was now rapidly declining. Large parts of the people demanded a return to Soviet conditions. The 40-year-old former political officer of the border troops, history teacher and sovkhoz chairman Alexander Lukashenko from the former communist faction took up this mood and in 1994 pushed through the removal of the nationalist Stanislau Schuschkiewicz as parliamentary president. After a tough election campaign, Lukashenko received 80.34% of the votes as President of the Republic with a 71% turnout. This balance of power remained stable for a long time. In the metropolis of Minsk and its environs, already described as difficult for the left, Lukashenko was able to increase to a remarkable 46%. In Grodno, the second largest city with 22% Polish population, it only came to 36%. Lukashenko, supported by the communists and the left, had majorities in 94% of all constituencies. In the cities it came to an average of 52%, in the villages to 61%. Lukashenko also secured his power with referendums. In 1995/96 he had the „blood flag“ abolished as the state flag, introduced the Soviet (without hammer and sickle, but with a star) and a coat of arms modeled on the Soviet (75%), decreed further rapprochement with Russia (82%), forbade the free sale of land (83%), led Russian, next to Belarusian,
Under Lukashenko, the economy was also revived. Although about half of the employees had lost their jobs with the modernization of agriculture, they were integrated and unemployment was reduced to 2%. Poverty was reduced from 42% (in 2000) to 8% (2007). From 1997 the growth rates in the economy increased again by an average of 10%. In agriculture, the level of the best Soviet years could be reached again. Belarus today has the highest standard of living of all the former Union republics (except the Baltic ones). Belarus now ranks 69th internationally, Poland 62nd and Russia 120th. However, this was also made possible by Russian subsidies for energy prices. Russia is the largest partner with around 50% of foreign trade,
A really decisive fight against the bourgeois opposition, which was enormously promoted by other EU countries, did not take place. Although the government drew attention to the subversive foreign support from the EU early on, for a long time the state only intervened in the event of criminal violations.
Thousands of Belarusians were able to use the freedom of movement to travel, members of the intelligentsia work in the West, such as Maria Kolesnikowa in the FRG, hundreds study in EU states etc. If today in elections in the Belarusian embassies around the globe of foreign Belarusians mostly If the opposition is elected, that is entirely plausible.
The star Lukashenko began to fade
Above all, Poland and Lithuania have been pushing for the elimination of Lukashenko since 1990 with subversive activities, especially with their mass media (telegram channel NEXTA, Belsat, etc.) in the national language and idealize the EU conditions. The attempt to found an “independent trade union” like “Solidarność” was rejected by the workers of state-owned companies in Belarus and stopped by the government.
In the meantime, the situation for Lukashenko had deteriorated. The KPB of Belarus (KPB), formerly 600,000 members, today only comprises 6,000, but is still the second largest force in parliament. Most MPs from other left parties hold fast to socialism. But the opportunity to form a left majority front was not used. With the propagation of Soviet traditions, the standard of living achieved, great social benefits and the always declaimed independence alone, however, what has been achieved cannot be secured politically and ideologically. In addition, the structures for this have developed unfavorably. In the course of the last 25 years, the war veterans, 30% of the left-wing electorate, have mostly disappeared for reasons of age. The working class and kolkhoz / sovkhoz peasants, another major group of voters on the left, have also decreased significantly in number. Many have emigrated to the state, but also to the private sector. In the state institutions, which generate 70% of the national income, only 43% of the employees are employed, in contrast to 57% in the private sector. Here the state has little influence, but the right does. Yet the right has failed to achieve a breakthrough in the past 30 years, with at best 1% of the vote. Few candidates made it into parliament. So far, there has been no possibility of finding a common denominator and uniting the sometimes diametrically opposed interests – including those in relation to Russia. So they always remained inferior to state power. but only 43% of employees are employed, whereas 57% are employed in the private sector. Here the state has little influence, but the right does. Yet the right has failed to achieve a breakthrough in the past 30 years, with at best 1% of the vote. Few candidates made it into parliament. So far, there has been no possibility of finding a common denominator and uniting the sometimes diametrically opposed interests – including those in relation to Russia. So they always remained inferior to state power. but only 43% of employees are employed, whereas 57% are employed in the private sector. Here the state has little influence, but the right does. Yet the right has failed to achieve a breakthrough in the past 30 years, with at best 1% of the vote. Few candidates made it into parliament. So far, there has been no possibility of finding a common denominator and uniting the sometimes diametrically opposed interests – including those in relation to Russia. So they always remained inferior to state power. Few candidates made it into parliament. So far, there has been no possibility of finding a common denominator and uniting the sometimes diametrically opposed interests – including those in relation to Russia. So they always remained inferior to state power. Few candidates made it into parliament. So far, there has been no possibility of finding a common denominator and uniting the sometimes diametrically opposed interests – including those in relation to Russia. So they always remained inferior to state power.
The West wanted to get rid of Lukashenko at last
This summer, however, a situation seemed to have matured for a breakthrough. Lukashenko is partly responsible for this: The economic situation deteriorated, which is why he tried to navigate between Russia and the EU / USA. This was interpreted as a weakness by his opponents, but its weighting was overestimated. In the run-up to the presidential elections, as usual, the right-wing and the foreign media allied with them did not recognize the results and protest. Lukashenko could and should have adjusted to this.
Only 20% of the rights were awarded. But even if they had been granted 30% it would still have sparked the same political response. Not only did the right spread the fact that the election had been fraudulent, they also declared themselves the sole winner. However, there was no justification for this, although the results spoke for them in some constituencies, including Minsk. Obviously it was not even a perceived majority, because they rejected a proposed recount and called for new elections. In new elections they could have deployed their forces better, but a victory would by no means be certain here either.
That is why they adopted a tactic that was not awkward: they demanded Lukashenko’s resignation. That was a still just legal requirement, under which they could unite all rights and other dissatisfied, despite differing views. That was the lowest common denominator to which everyone could link their own wishes. The right did not announce a program. Hence no further political demands emerged.
But that could only succeed if enough people were brought onto the streets in Minsk and Belarus, the law enforcement agencies were provoked, and the state power would give way through deaths. Then Lukashenko would also have resigned.
Lukashenko unexpectedly shows himself able to survive
This calculation did not work out. State power remained consistent, did not allow itself to be provoked and Lukashenko remained adamant. This repelled the first and decisive attack. The rights had actually already lost. The hypocritical demand for a dialogue between Lukashenko and those involved in his overthrow had no chance due to the intransigence of the president. With Lukashenko’s refusal and the steadfastness of the state power, the counter-revolution had in fact failed. Nor were there 100,000 on the streets in Minsk, which the pictures clearly showed. For these „masses“ a chain of 200 police officers was enough to bring them to a stop. In the media there was always talk of tens and hundreds of thousands. But for attentive observers, also bearing in mind the Corona distance, only between two and five thousand protesters took to the streets, as many as the left could mobilize. For other cities like Grodno it was far less if the published pictures were supposed to be correct. In general, in Minsk alone, the right wing could only get a relatively small number of people onto the streets, and here they would have potentially had around 300,000 people at their disposal.
The darlings of the western media run out of breath surprisingly quickly
Svetlana Tichanovskaya, the figurehead of the right, fled to Lithuania, where the untalented politician, now completely under foreign influence, used the aggressively ignorant language of the Sajudis nationalists, as in the last few years of Soviet power in Belarus. Tichanovskaya negotiated as a self-proclaimed “leader of the people and the revolution” with German and US representatives (she teaches German / English) and asked the EU and the USA for help. In doing so, it not only unjustifiably internationalized the conflict, but also made itself a criminal offense on the basis of every state law in the world by calling for the creation of a coordination council to overthrow Lukashenko. Maria Kolesnikova, who, emotionally charged,
Russia was a key factor. From the very beginning, the EU, and especially the FRG, has ultimately called for a dialogue with counterrevolutionaries and for Russia to not intervene. Tichanovskaya irresponsibly spread the word from Vilnius that Russia would not intervene to keep the protesters engaged. Had Lukashenko given in, the counter-revolution would have triumphed and Russian intervention would have been impossible. Not only did Lukashenko show determination and steadfastness, he also threatened Russia with military aid in the event of violent escalation and interference by the West. In this case most of the demonstrators would have withdrawn,
In the meantime, the Belarusian state power is taking action against illegal organizations, such as the counterrevolutionary coordination council, with general legal and criminal law means, as is customary in countries with constitutional systems. The number of demonstrators has already decreased in the meantime.
Since 1989, the West has suffered its second major defeat in Belarus after the Crimea.
Gefällt mir:
Like Wird geladen …
CO-OP NEWS 