Opposition uses parliamentary election campaign to strengthen its position

Category status:
April 22, 2016 18:14

The 2012 parliamentary elections are considered as a political, rather than an electoral campaign by all opposition forces. Apparently, no one cherishes hopes for entering the Parliament. Those parties and movements that decided to participate in the election campaign, as well as those that decided to boycott it, set the aim of the campaign as strengthening their positions in the political field. The \"moderate\" ones aim to do this through the expansion of the electoral support, and the \"radical\" ones – through strengthening their position among the traditional opposition-minded voters. At the same time, some political forces use the campaign as a part of long-term plans, seeking to increase their capacity to participate in Presidential and local elections in 2014-2015.

The 2012 parliamentary elections have become a catalyst for structuring the \"constructive\" and \"confrontational\" movements of the Belarusian opposition, who have different visions of the transformation process of the Belarusian regime and forms to influence it.

At the moment there is a convergence of views among the organizations of the “moderate” opposition, which become the basis for a long-term cooperation. The \"moderate\" wing of the opposition are represented by the \"Movement \"For Freedom \"(MFF, Milinkevich), the campaign \"Tell the Truth\" (TT, Nyaklyaeu) and the Belarusian Popular Front Party (BPF). These dominate in the coalition of six leading opposition forces, formed during 2011. In the parliamentary elections of 2012 the positions of MFF and TT coincide and provide for a full participation of activists of these organizations in the elections 2012.

The BPF has traditionally been a MFF partner and supported its initiatives. Unlike For Freedom and Tell the Truth! the party status requires the BPF to clearly formulate its official position on the participation format in the election campaign. The BPF made a decision on the conditional participation of their candidates in the parliamentary campaign with their withdrawal from the election race on the eve of early voting. However, the structures of For Freedom and the BPF are closely integrated, and many candidates who will run for Parliamentary elections represent both opposition groups.

In turn, many leaders who plan to run as Tell the Truth candidates, have, in the majority of cases, a dual loyalty to other opposition parties, mainly the United Civil Party (UCP). UCP, the Belarusian Christian Democracy (BCD), the Belarusian Party of the United Left \"Just World\" and the Belarusian Social Democratic Party (Hromada), whose central authorities decided on a conditional participation in the parliamentary campaign.

There is not yet a single coordination center among the opposition groups that use the tactics of boycotting the parliamentary campaign. The \"confrontational\" movement of the opposition is represented by the organization committee for the creation of the \"Belarusian Movement,\" the civil campaign \"European Belarus\", the Conservative Christian Party BPF, the \"Young Front\", the Belarusian Social Democratic Hromada (BSDH) and other network initiatives.

Using harsh repression against the leaders of respective organizations, the authorities have managed to significantly weaken the opposition structures, that imply a radical rhetoric. The best-known and respected representative of the movement, Andrei Sannikov, who is based on the structures of the \"Belarusian Movement”, the civil campaign \"European Belarus\" and the BSDH, was released from prison in April this year. Since then, however, he has refrained from making plans regarding his participation in the political life of the country.

Another respected representative of the \"radical\" opposition, Nikolai Statkevich, is in custody, and even if released, he will most likely be unable to participate in the election campaign in 2015.

Despite the great support potential among the radical opposition part, the probability of the return of Zenon Paznyak, the legend of the national liberation movement of the early 1990s and the leader of the Conservative Christian Party BPF, in political exile now, remains quite low.

At the same time, there has been no clear vision of the strategy for the Presidential campaign of 2015 in the actions of the other two major opposition organizations - \"Just World\", formerly Communists), and BCD, which are represented by a coalition of six leading opposition forces. However, the unification of these forces is possible around the UCP leader Lebedzko.

Similar articles

Belarusian and Ukrainian Defence Ministries entangle in confrontation spiral
October 02, 2017 11:57
Фото: RFRM

Over the past year, military-political relations between Minsk and Kyiv have become complicated. Due to their high inertia and peculiarities, this downward trend would be extremely difficult to overcome.

The root cause of the crisis is the absence of a common political agenda in the Belarusian-Ukrainian relations. Minsk is looking for a market for Belarusian exports in Ukraine and offers its services as a negotiation platform for the settlement of the Russo-Ukrainian war, thereby hoping to avoid political issues in the dialogue with Kiev. Meanwhile, Ukraine is hoping for political support from Minsk in the confrontation with Moscow. In addition, Ukraine’s integration with NATO presupposes her common position with the Alliance in relation to Belarus. The NATO leadership regards the Belarusian Armed Forces as an integral part of the Russian military machine in the western strategic front (the Baltic states and Poland). In addition, the ongoing military reform in Ukraine envisages a reduction in the number of generals and the domestic political struggle makes some Ukrainian top military leaders targets in politically motivated attacks.

Hence, the criticism of Belarus coming from Ukrainian military leadership is dictated primarily by internal and external political considerations, as well as by the need to protect the interests of generals, and only then by facts.

For instance, initially, the Ukrainian military leadership made statements about 100,000 Russian servicemen allegedly taking part in the Russo-Belarusian military drill West-2017. Then the exercises were labelled quazi-open and military observers from Ukraine refused to provide their assessment, which caused a negative reaction in Minsk. Further, without citing specific facts, it was stated that Russia was building up its military presence in Belarus.

Apparently, the Belarusian and Ukrainian Defence Ministries have entangled in a confrontational spiral (on the level of rhetoric). Moreover, only a small part of the overly hidden process has been disclosed. That said, third states are very likely to take advantage of the situation (or have already done so). This is not only about Russia.

The Belarusian Defence Ministry officials are restrained in assessing their Ukrainian counterparts. However, such a restraint is not enough. Current military-political relations between Belarus and Ukraine are unlikely to stabilise without the intervention of both presidents.

Recent trends