[ad_1]
At the end of 2018, tensions between Russian and Belarusian presidents Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko reached unprecedented levels. The main reason was the statements of senior Russian political leaders on the unification of the two states, about which the Belarussian President reacted in a very negative way.
On the real possibilities of absorption of Belarus by the Russian Federation, OBOZREVATEL questioned former Duma deputy of the Russian Federation, Konstantin Borov
– In recent years, Discussions on the unification of the two states into a new allied state do not subsist. In some cases this would be an inevitable fact, although some political scientists tend to think that Lukashenko will simply not surrender. In your opinion, will Belarus be able to defend its independence or will we see it in the Russian Federation?
– Belarus is no longer an independent state: economically, politically, from a military point of view, it only constitutes part of the territory of Russia – a colony.
Konstantin Borovoy
Facebook Borovoy
The Belarusian president is now a governor with a special status. He has the right to spend the budget as he sees fit, no control board is overseeing this process. He can do anything.
It is very convenient, such was in the time of Yeltsin (Boris Yeltsin, first president of the Russian Federation – Ed.) To Shaimiev (Mintimer Shaimiev, first president of Tatarstan – Ed.) He has achieved a degree of autonomy in Russia that could afford such blackmail, as Lukashenka now does. When he was not giving enough resources or was taking too much, he spoke of the need to establish a foreign ministry in Tatarstan. Then, at one point, he started saying that there should be his own armed forces. Then, Shaimieva immediately arranged an interrogation he had in mind, and he immediately softened the speech by saying that the conscripts of the Russian Federation should serve on the territory of Tatarstan.
Mintimer Shaimiev
"Tatar-inform" 19659008] Another very similar situation concerned Yeltsin and Gaman Tulyeev (governor of the Kemerovo region from 1997 to 2018 – Ed.). Moreover, such little kings who played in Yeltsin's contradictions with communists and nationalists, also allowed themselves to oppose Yeltsin. He had a lot of influence, suffered the blackmail of miners' strikes, although he was sweeter than Shamiev, but used the same technology.
Belarus ceased to be an independent state at the time when Alexander Grigorovich had abolished the elections. In the form of an authoritarian state – these are related things. But Belarus is not an independent state.
All his games with the EU obviously raise the issue of dissidents, political opposition, the lack of functioning democratic institutions in Belarus. A very controversial situation, any attempt at flooding with the West immediately causing some political process, discussions are under way about the possibility of using Lukashenka as leader of the opposition opposed to a Russia authoritarian.
Alexander Lukashenko
Belarusian special services are a branch of Russian special services.
And the political structures … All are right to say that the representatives of the Belarusian nomenklatura, which can be described as conditional elites also do not want to be imprisoned for illegal or inappropriate use of resources. They are in agreement with Lukashenka and it is a form of stability for them. Why the Foreign Minister to go to Moscow for every opportunity, to coordinate his positions, statements of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, it also lacks its chairman.
There, the structure almost completely resumes its Soviet counterpart. In the USSR, all structures were nested in a hierarchical system of subordination. For the Belarusian nomenclature, this is a very serious, very relative but independent loss.
The Belarusian people – even if there is no economy, it is very weak, very dependent on Russia – is satisfied with this situation. Prices are quite low, wages and pensions stable, but not high.
Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko
But it is clear that if something changes radically, it will also affect the Belarussians. There is no great enthusiasm. Although some trends are emerging, they are very cautious, as Ukraine does, but they will not enact laws on decommunization. Because it is to some extent the ideological basis of Lukashenka, not Stalin, of course, but the father of the people.
And the decision will always be taken in the Kremlin, and that's what Lukashenko understands. The Kremlin has already put in place mechanisms of coercion, and if these mechanisms come to power, then Lukashenko simply can not stay in power.
The modern system of society does not allow the success of dependent colonies, it is inefficient, whether politically or economically. This means that there is only one form of existence and that the question no longer concerns Belarus and Russia, but Lukashenka and the Kremlin. It is clear that it turns it into a common process or creates visibility of the problem of Belarusian independence, but these discussions have nothing to do with genuine independence. This is not the case and it will not be until the people want this independence.
I think all of this will end very quickly and radically. It is very likely that the intelligence services will provide something in this debate, which may even be bloody.
– In your opinion, is Belarus only one way to Russia?
– You understand how, the way that leads to Tatarstan, now, only in Russia, the way to the Chechen Republic – only in Russia, the way to Transnistria – only in Russia, the way to Abkhazia and South Ossetia – only in Russia, why? Because they are not independent states, they are the colonies occupied by the territory of Russia. They have no choice, it is a problem. And in Lukashenko, there is no other choice.
Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko
– Ukraine was also considered a "colony" of Russia, but we are now fighting for our independence and the Belarus in
– Opportunities are, there is no desire. Because, in the condition of true independence of Belarus, without political imitation, without political imitation, economic elites will not survive without imitation. In Belarus, such processes can lead to serious changes.
What they seek to make radical these changes, so that the model of the imitation of independence remains. An example similar to this is the Chechen Republic, where Kadyrov states that he leads the security forces and that he does not need the FSB or other security structures in Chechnya.
His last statement concerned the reduction of subsidies. As far as we know, the Chechen Republic can only obtain 17%. It is at a time when incomes are falling and it is clear that Kadyrov is no longer sufficient for his expenses.
Now the struggle is not for the independence of these territories, but for the condition in which they are colonies and all the rest.
This concerns Ukraine. You declared the independence of Russia, but not like Belarus or Chechnya. You started to make reforms. This independence was perhaps incomplete for Yanukovych, but it was not subsidized, it was a true independence. And the clans, which depended on Russian oligarchs, still dreamed of total independence. This is what happened, but not by the efforts of the clans themselves nor by the leadership of Ukraine, but by those of the expansionist and aggressive Kremlin policy.
We are in Telegram! Sign up! Read the best!
Read all the "Russian News" on OBOZREVATEL.
[ad_2]
Source link
