President Lukashenko strengthens ‘anti-corruption’ pressure on officials
Amid declining manageability of the state apparatus in Belarus and the power crisis in Ukraine, Belarus’ president is stepping up pressure on state officials in order to mobilise them ahead of the presidential campaign. In anticipation of the 2015 election campaign, President Lukashenko is honing his anti-corruption rhetoric and is preparing the population for anti-corruption propaganda to deflect attention from the lack of progress in socio-economic development. In the near future, the Belarusian government has no plans either to introduce major changes in the power system, or to reform the existing socio-economic model.
While visiting the Bereza Power Plant, President Lukashenko instructed more effort to be put into the criminal investigation at the power plant.
Throughout his rule, President Lukashenko has successfully used anti-corruption rhetoric to boost his ratings, especially ahead of the election campaigns. The president aspires to increase the public sector’s efficiency by putting pressure on state managers: “We shall enact full responsibility. This is to ensure accountability for the public funds. All public expenditures put an enormous burden on the population and largely on the real economy”.
President Lukashenko is deeply concerned about corruption, bearing in mind the impact that corruption has on how state apparatus can be managed. Ukraine acts as a poignant reminder. For example, in 2013, 2,301 corruption crimes were registered in Belarus, which is 29.3% more than in 2012. In H1 2014, more than 550 corruption-related crimes were registered. While Transparency International puts Belarus above Russia and Ukraine in its Corruption Perception Index, Belarus has slipped down the ranks in recent years: from 74th in 2004 to 123rd in 2013. Recently, almost all ‘flagman’ governmental programmes have derailed, been hindered or have not achieved their economic goals.
The Belarusian population also appears to have noticed a lack of progress in the state’s fight against corruption. According to recent polls by IISEPS, only 39.1% agreed with Lukashenko that “the Belarusian authorities constantly and firmly fight against corruption”, while 48.4% disagreed. This perception seems to be why the president has reinforced anti-corruption show-trials and enhanced his anti-corruption rhetoric. For instance, members of the upper house of the Belarusian Parliament have stripped their colleague - Director General at Vitebsk Broiler Farm Shareyko – of parliamentary immunity. In addition, a month ago, another senator (Vitali Kostogorov) had his parliamentary immunity removed and was arrested. Interestingly, both are successful businessmen.
Recently, the state-run media reported that “following a request by the Head of State”, the draft Law “On Fighting against Corruption” was put out for public discussion. Public debates about draft laws are extremely scarce in Belarus – the government effectively prevents citizens from debating draft legislation. In this particular case, Lukashenko said, “people should know where officials obtain money and property from”.
In addition, Lukashenko announced the next stage in reforming the state apparatus as well as further staff-cuts. It is noteworthy that he also hinted about reducing the state’s functions: “we can still halve the state apparatus by stepping up discipline and by removing certain functions from the state apparatus – ones that are not attributable or simply harmful”. Over the years, many independent experts have talked about the need to strip the government of some functions in order to improve management and efficiency of the state, and to reduce corruption.
Lukashenko will continue strengthening his anti-corruption rhetoric and there will be more show-trials against corrupt state managers. However, the Belarusian government will not carry out significant changes in the public administration structure before the presidential campaign.
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.