Ukrainian version for Belarus
At first glance, it was difficult to find two nearby post-Soviet countries with such a difference in ideology, economy, foreign and domestic policy, as Ukraine and Belarus. Here and there, just everything was different, if RB stubbornly "clinging" of the Soviet legacy and the Soviet experience in the field of social organization, Ukraine resolutely tore them. Ukraine has never positioned itself as "the best and the last ally of Russia", the political system in Ukraine and Belarus differs fundamentally. But fate can not be fooled. Rock dominates over kings and pharaohs.
Looking at the misadventures of Blue-eyed, you involuntarily recall the sad fate of Oedipus, and even the Oedipus complex can develop. It seems that the fate (fate, kismet) still exists and it does not get away from anyone, neither the king nor a hero nor a beggar ... It's a shame, you know. I want free will, and not observed it. The funny thing is that the mentality of the Belarusians and Ukrainians differ very seriously, and if Ukraine - "Solyanka", the RB - very homogeneous. But when the initial parameters are completely different, the result for some reason turns out to be very, very similar.
One of the reasons, probably, is the following: both there and there, the “titans” of thought ultimately came to power. In Russia, we unwittingly automatically transfer our understanding of the situation to other countries, but this is not always true. In Ukraine / Belarus, in this regard, "the pipe is lower and the smoke is thinner." Provinces.
That is what the "elites" of these newly formed states saw the "main danger"? Right! In the "attempt of annexation by Russia". It was against this main danger that they began to "build barriers." One can only envy the frank idiocy of such an approach: forcibly absorbing the 50-million independent Ukraine (provided that the economy and the state work normally) by the forces of the 150-million Russia is almost impossible. If you think a little about this issue (without emotion), then everything falls into place. It is technically impossible. No, if there was a sincere desire from the Ukrainian side, if we start this process at the end of 90 ... It sounds funny, of course.
To any adequate person familiar with the state of minds in Ukraine, it is absolutely clear that “the absorption of Ukraine” is a mythology. Technically impossible because. No, you can dream, but no more. Then what were the "integration efforts of Moscow" aimed at? And the economy as a whole is much more profitable to use. Formerly shared - gave big bonuses. Hardly anyone in the Russian leadership of the end of the 90-x / beginning of the 0-x was so politically naive, that he could dream of recreating the USSR. Stupidity because both. Absolute. But it was precisely this that was feared in Kiev ... And it was precisely against this that barriers were erected. Funny, huh?
They considered themselves so “wise”: they revealed the Kremlin’s dreadful plan. Children, by God. That is, it was assumed that Russia would “join” Ukraine of the last of its strength. The fact that this requires huge political and economic resources, was somehow not taken into account. And even today, many naive people in Russia do not understand this. A certain economic integration was offered, which was very beneficial for Ukraine, given the structure and geography of its trade. That is, the pragmatists were sitting quite in the Kremlin. The trouble is that in Kiev there were frank amateurs. They understood everything simply.
Recall only the magical, fabulous plan "3 + 1". According to it, Ukraine has in the CU almost the same rights as the rest of the country 3, but at the same time retains full “free hand” The reason for such a rare naivety: distrust of Russia and the openly amateurish level of Ukrainian politicians. That is, the entire complexity of world politics and economics was absolutely inaccessible to them. Moscow offers something there - it means that the Russians want to seize Ukraine. Ukrainian nationalism was largely unwound by the “local” for precisely this reason (such a “secret combo”). As a result, Ukraine has managed to build “anti-integration barriers” very well. It is a pity, this cannot be said about the economy and statehood.
The funny thing is that it is a policy we have the good fortune to observe in "brotherly Belarus". One to one, even embroidered. The trend, however. About the fact that “everything is good and someone is stirring up there,” I'm sorry, the Ukrainians literally, before Odessa (and after Odessa!), Tried to say something like that. Literally, when there was a war, the artillery of the Armed Forces of Ukraine beat the residential areas of Slavyansk at close range. What, they say, someone is "inciting" something. This is called a cover operation. By the way, none of those who carried it out in Ukraine, now “does not get in touch”. Our “Ukrainian friends” have disappeared somewhere.
If “all is well”, then this should be observed in fact, and not painfully “stretched.” Just the “reference points” in Belarus and Ukraine are painfully similar: an attempt to blackmail with a valve, an attempt to blackmail with NATO bases. The desire to squeeze the maximum out of economic cooperation with Russia and at the same time the desire to distance itself politically from it as much as possible. Constant signals to the West that Russia is threatening them ... Lukashenko’s frankly boorish statements against Russia pursue precisely this goal: to provoke a tough reaction from Moscow. After that, Makei can run to the west and “cry into the waistcoat” - we are offended by bad Russians. And that was all. With Ukraine.
Belarusian nationalism pursues the same goal - to guarantee the “non-alignment regime” to Russia. Which, by the way, makes you think about how real Belarus is at all ... For some reason, the Belarusian authorities considered from the very beginning a single “risk scenario” for Belarus - an attempt to annex Russia, and actively put obstacles in it. Such are the "cunning and thoughtful." Russophobia planted from above and nationalism planted from above serve precisely this purpose.
“Belarusian patriots” are considering exactly this scenario: Russians will come to us, and we will “meet them with dignity”. Funny happened. These very sentiments: nationalism and Russophobia, once launched, sooner or later had to get out of control. It's like in Kiev, the very "pre-prepared" nationalists on the basis of the demolished power itself. But did Yanukovych prepare them not against himself? Funny, by the way, it turned out. This is me on the events of the Maidan-2. Funny. Where, in fact, in the capital of Ukraine took all these "radishes"? Good Yanukovych, good Berkut ... Do not be so naive. Russophobia and nationalism in the Ukraine were fed for decades. And in the winter of 2013 / 14, it all worked.
Only one small attempt by Yanukovich to make a step towards Moscow led to the unification of Ukrainian political forces. against him and its subsequent demolition. Taking a small step towards Moscow from Europe, Yanukovych immediately found himself in complete political isolation. Yanukovych temporarily refused the Euro-Association and signed something with Putin, taking the money from him. And this led to a political explosion in Kiev. The fraternal Ukrainian people, he is so ... fraternal. That is, the nationalism of the Russophobic plan, once launched, sooner or later gets out of control.
Before Yanukovych loomed "fork": Ukraine urgently needs money that Europe does not give, but Putin gives, but the entire Ukrainian political council is waiting for Yanukovych to sign the Euro-Association (and not to join the CU!). It makes no sense to scold Yanukovych - he certainly wasn’t a good politician, but he didn’t have any good options either. As a result of many years of propaganda, Russophobic nationalism spun out of control and hit hard on the head of those who took care of it and cherished it. "Pro-Russian position", which the President of Ukraine forcedly took at the end of 2013 year, turned out to be absolutely suicidal. People against People were set on Russia for a very long time. Funny, huh? “Bagatovector” existed only while the same Azarov denoted movement east An attempt to really move there led to a complete demolition of the regime. Such is the “bagatovector”. Step to the right, step to the left ... That is, the economic vector is to the east, the political vector is to the west. So much for your “bagovatovnost”.
Say: good Yanukovych, good Golden Eagle? Oh well. With Belarus is about the same. Funny fact: Belarusians are accustomed to call themselves “Russian allies”. They are accustomed to it and take it for granted. However, even if in a veiled form, the processes of propaganda of nationalism / Russophobia were launched here. Sooner or later it was supposed to work. Inevitably had to. Until a certain moment the dog turns its tail, then the tail begins to turn the dog. If you said A, then sooner or later doydosh to the soft sign.
For Russians, the most surprising was the lack of support from the Republic of Belarus during the South Ossetian conflict. Complete absence. And this, excuse me, is just the result of long-term propaganda and not at all in the pro-Russian vein. The Belarusians did not like Russia's actions against Saakashvili’s eagles. And they did not support us. Yes, and it happened not at all suddenly: let us remember two Chechen acts, terrorist attacks in Russia - did you hear anything about help from the Republic of Belarus? Me not. Until a certain point, it was possible to disguise and “blather”, but in the end the situation became completely indecent. In the end, it would be possible to somehow clarify some distance from conflicts in the post-Soviet space, but the war in Syria ... Where Russia clashed with the wicked ISIL banned in Russia ...
Even in this critical case of fighting the blatantly anti-human infection, Belarus did not provide any support. Not even diplomatic. Silence. Whose official side is Minsk in this conflict? Good question, yes?
Well, for us, this is all a surprise and causes complete incomprehension, but for Belarusians, everything is in order. They went to this for a long time. By the construction of Belarus, which is not Russia even once. Once again about the fact that all this is not true and in fact ... There is, excuse me, the foreign policy of the state of Belarus, which does not cause mass discontent within the country. There is a Belarusian (Russian-language!) Press. There are numerous comments on this press. And everything “hits”, and everything “fits”. For Belarusians, the war of Russia in Syria is a foreign war. Moreover, there is a certain dissatisfaction - Russia has "climbed" somewhere (without the permission of the radiant West, how impudent!).
If someone does not know, then in the Belarusian press, the Crimea is “annexed”, and that’s just that and nothing else. Surprising in all this disgrace is not enough. People have been brainwashed for many years, that, they say, there is some kind of “Rush” there, and there is Belarus ... practically “holy land”. I want to cry of emotion and blow my nose in a handkerchief. All these years, Lukashenko was preparing to rebuff the case "attempts of annexation." He explained to Belarusians that they were not Russians. He did it perfectly well. He cleaned up the political space in Belarus even better (and this person wants to go to Europe!).
But nothing more he did not work at all. Strange man, is not it? In general, some kind of elite in Belarus is so many years engaged in such nonsense. Kindle nationalist passions and spread rot to the economy. We then thought, we have some kind of cooperation, development, integration here, and the Belarusian leadership, wryly smiling, secretly snarled the trenches. As a result, Belarus is in fact bankrupt, but Lukashenko’s ideological component is all right. Most of the young Belarusians know that Belarus is “hoo”, that if they are “climbed from the east” to them ... It reminds something, isn't it? Harvesting cannon fodder on an industrial scale. That is, this "mоlodging "categorically does not imagine today where it will work and what to live for ... but if they" come to them from the east "...
Simply, the Moscow-Minsk dialogue follows a rather stupid and quite familiar trajectory: the proposal to pay for gas in response is followed by accusations of political pressure. There is gas consumed, there are bills for it, you have to pay ... nothing to pay. It is loud, hysterical politicized - aggression, energy blackmail. It’s categorically uninteresting to talk about it, if only because we have already done all this with Ukraine. When a political play is played out around gas bills.
Remind me how it ended with Ukraine? That is, instead of paying for gas, Lukashenko assumes to engage in political blackmail: you will demand payment in full - there will be scandals ... By the way, he could solve some of his problems with gas and other “nishtyaks” simply: showing permanent political loyalty. That with complete economic dependence is quite logical. But Lukashenka is too “proud” for this. And besides, and the people waiting for "hard decisions" from him. Propaganda has given its fruits.
And here we have such a funny conflict: the state categorically refuses to support Russian policy, but at the same time it is tough requires increasing subsidies to infinity. The funny thing is that for many Belarusians it seems quite logical - Russia should pay Belarus for the very fact of its existence. And pay dearly! Listen, I thought here: why do we need all these difficulties with the "fraternal peoples", let's take on the maintenance of Honduras? And there will be more sense, and less money is needed ... Well, if we want to help someone, then we can help Honduras ...
You know, in fact, there is no conflict in relations between Belarus and the Russian Federation. In fact, we have a dead end from which there is no way out. Belarus has no respect for Russia and no desire to help her and do something for her. There is a certain irony: from the point of view of the Belarusian elites, the United States and the EU are doing real politics, and Russia is also “climbing” somewhere ... But Russia is obliged to help them. The last few years have been actively “knocking out” of material resources from Russia (it was before, but not so obvious).
Putin and Lukashenko not agree about anything, because Alexander G. wants everything and for free. And Vladimir Vladimirovich, this whole bother with Minsk was already fed up with order. There will be no more gifts, and Mr. Lukashenko is not ready to make political concessions on principle. Here “Yanukovych syndrome” starts to work - any attempt to begin to give Moscow at least something serious can shake the throne of the President of Belarus. Both before the people and before the elites, he clearly stated his principle: “Not a bit of concessions to Moscow. They will come and all will give. Because you have me. " Retreat from this he can not. Late, you had to think before. Understand, yesterday Lukashenko did not want to pursue a pro-Russian policy (he was capricious), today he can’t.
So today the political configuration in Minsk has developed, that the beginning of a frankly pro-Russian foreign policy would be political suicide for Lukashenko. For too long, he played in the "sovereign" that now he could play back - sweep the avalanche. Tail already wags the dog. At one time, the “kind and affectionate” Putin actually drove Yanukovich into a corner: the receipt of money was strictly due to frank pro-Russian steps. After that, someone reproaches Putin for “softness” and “naivety” - why was it given money to Ukraine? All one does not return. This is if you do not take into account what these very “pro-Russian steps” for the Ukrainian president were fraught with - almost everyone betrayed him.
In many respects, the situation for Lukashenko is similar: there are “elites” who look to the West and who are “comfortable” there, there are pro-Western young people, there is “an agonizing sense of Europeanism”. If Lukashenka suddenly places the Russian base and recognizes the Crimea ... it could destroy consensus in society. But even in our difficult times, Putin is totally uninteresting to sponsor it is not clear what. There are some dull and uncertain allies who categorically object to some joint action.
In principle, Lukashenko is to blame for himself - it was he who let the genie of nationalism out of the bottle. He and deal with him. In general, he is not from evil - just such a person has a “prediction level”. He was just pawned on the option when "climb from the east" ... and then the nationalists. That is, this very statement of Lukashenka about Belarus in the role of Chechnya is by no means accidental. And precisely for this, all this jazz and all these disgraces that caused the sincere discontent of the Russians were created. Lukashenko considered the “Russian aggression” almost a “decided case” and was actively preparing to resist it. Including the forces of nationalists. Here you have Belarus! Take a bite!
Unfortunately, the people in the Kremlin were not so romantic, and no one planned to “cross the border”. From the word completely, dumb idiots. Lukashenka was simply politely asked to pay for the gas consumed and politely put the border guards on the frontiers with Belarus. And Lukashenka has a full-blown economic crisis at home and the rise of nationalists. And what should he do with all this? We somehow underestimate the internal political movements in Belarus, but they exist, and they do not intersect with Russian in any way. The economy is falling, growing discontent, growing destructive moods. That very nationalism is growing ... And the nationalists blame the “pro-Russian course” of Belarus and membership in the EEU.
There are no “pro-Russian sentiments” there as the mainstream. But the volume of aid from the east is urgently required. Hence the tough conflicts. Once upon a time, Lukashenka had a choice - whether to make a bet on Russophiles or Russophobes. Today he has no choice. The situation is like Yanukovych at the end of 2013 year ... You need to get help from the country, a friendly policy towards which is absolutely impossible. Therefore, hard blackmail. Alexander Grigorievich’s space for maneuver is strictly limited: one cannot get money, one can be swept away, but one cannot go to the conditions of the Kremlin either ... similarly. The only salvation for him is defiantly “bending over” Putin and knocking out a lot of money and other “nishtyakov” ... From here arrests and provocations ...
I do not feel, you know, optimism about the prospects for Belarus ... We absolutely do not want to study the "intra-Belarusian" situation. Belarusians are not different from us in language and not history. Strong differences are observed in the current political situation and, if in history, in the newest (the most recent). Russia did not receive any support in the Belarusian society during the recent conflicts. What caused serious disappointment in the "ally". According to my observations, it was precisely in the last two years that the attitude towards Belarus in Russia deteriorated sharply. It is impossible to constantly call yourself an ally, but not to confirm this in practice. Sooner or later, questions will begin, serious questions.
Belarusians today, in turn, categorically do not care about the problems and tasks of Russia, the interest is purely mercantile in nature: access to the Russian market, obtaining loans ... in gratitude, people are ready to make a little smile ... Any refusal causes hysteria in terms of "fraternal integration" they are less interested ... The whole trouble is that in Belarus there was no “shock therapy”, there was no “wild capitalism” and people just don’t “catch up” with what. Well, remember us in 1989, the year itself ... Remember, remember ... what a frank heresy we believed in ...
Somehow, over time, this is forgotten, but socialism, in addition to positive ones, also had negative features. Yes Yes exactly. The good remains in the memory, the bad is forgotten ... I'm not talking about queues, if someone thought about it. I'm talking about social demagogy, a phenomenon that is very common at the end of socialism. "Some words for kitchens, others for streets ..." That's right. If someone does not remember, many were convinced that “balabolit” in response to very specific questions is a kind of magic wand. To those who have no such experience, explain it. absolutely useless. It must be experienced. Such is the special cut of world history: the ideological society to the limit at the end of ideology.
The time when political slogans turned into idle spells, but everyone continued to tinker together ... Then in Russia (Ukraine) there were “dashing 90-e”, in Russia there was Chechnya. So a citizen of the Russian Federation sample 2001, fundamentally different from the late Soviet inhabitants of the USSR. Demagoguery has lost its usefulness / attractiveness / respect. One of the few good features of 90's: in Russia, they learned to be “responsible for the bazaar”. In Ukraine, for some reason, this did not happen ... And all the more so, nothing like this happened in Belarus. One solid, almost continuous socialism. But socialism has not only positive features.
Perhaps RB - a product of "decay" of the Soviet system. Cynically, I agree, but Belarus didn’t cause and doesn’t cause any stormy enthusiasm, I don’t see any reason, point-blank. To hell with them, with money, but in the field of morality / ideology, everything is not so healthy and rosy, as they try to imagine. What was definitely good in the USSR was anti-fascism. And nothing funny (as shown by the subsequent history of Europe) is not here. By the way, I remember the LiveJournal of one of our compatriots in modern Germany: his friend (German) receives money from an ATM and immediately a gaggle of "madmen" is drawn nearby. Our man (not burdened with tolerance) flooded them with a threatening face and sent ... loud and far.
"Beshentsy" fled, but a bunch of indignant outright xenophobia of the Germans has gathered. And then our friend explained the situation in German, but using some Russian idiomatic expressions, having heard that the Germans immediately dispersed. Logic: mate means Russian means not fascist. This is exactly what unites us and shares with Europeans: attitude to fascism. Once again, if someone does not understand: this is what separates Russians from Europeans. Interesting is the refraction of this issue in Ukraine. The word "fascist" tightly entered the Russian language as a curse, and there's nothing you can do about it. So, what should the “poor Ukrainians” do against the background of the worship of Ban Bandera and all these torchlight processions?
Powerful attempts have been made and are being made to prove that fascism is just in Russia ... and not in Ukraine. War and the Germans.
The logic is simple (childish): all Ukrainians are good, which means they cannot be bad fascists by definition; All Russian bad-so here they are the Nazis! Even the fact that Russia is a strong, prosperous state in this context is associated by Ukrainians with Hitler and his empire. Hearing accusations from fans of the SS Division "Galicia" in fascism - is "something with something." However, Ukrainians do not consider themselves fascists. Such a ... squiggle.
So Belarus cannot cause any piety of Belarus even for this simple reason: there is no rejection of fascism, it is absent as a class. The marches of the SS legionnaires in neighboring Latvia and close Estonia (and later in Kiev!) Did not provoke a harsh and hostile reaction from Minsk. By no means. They are friends with neighbors, no matter what colors they painted themselves. One gets the impression that their neighbors have no problems ... Everything is a bundle. The problem of political rights of Russian-speakers in the same Latvia is also not interesting for Minsk. From the word at all.
And now, on the basis of this, one would doubt the prosperous prospects of the very "Union State". Somehow in the first step a million questions arise. Somehow, gentlemen, comrades, very little than Belarus resembles the USSR, nothing in common. People actively use the Soviet legacy, but on principles of society they have long been abandoned.
The fascist coup in Kiev and the triumph of the Right Sector didn’t cause any exclusion from the official Minsk either. And this is, sorry, the diagnosis. That is, fascism / anti-fascism - for the official Minsk is the subject bargaining and discussion. Here, in my opinion, it was all over. The official position of the Republic of Belarus: the current government in Kiev is completely legitimate, and the Crimea is annexed (as written in Belarusian newspapers).
In fact, the problems were accumulated for a very long time, just in Moscow they stubbornly closed their eyes on them, and from a certain moment it became impossible to close their eyes. That is, there will never be a “rollback” in mutual relations. It's impossible. The differences are fundamental. The wide and powerful financing of the Republic of Belarus before 2009 was explained very simply: it was our “outpost” and there was no pity for any money. The official Minsk really liked the fact that “money is not a pity”, but then the war broke out in South Ossetia ... and it turned out that the “outpost” was frankly rotten.
That is, the recognition / non-recognition of South Ossetia was not interesting in itself, but primarily as a “lice check”. So, "daddy" it fell down. The recognition of the two new states of the Republic of Belarus did not make much difference in terms of world tiles, but clearly signaled readiness to support Russia at a difficult moment. And this very readiness was not demonstrated. “And if there is no difference, then why pay more?” It is strange that so far no one in Minsk wanted to understand the direct connection between subsidies and allied relations.
Rather, as already mentioned, the socialist demagogy in Belarus has never been “killed” by anyone, so there’s absolutely no reason to argue on the topic of “alliance” there, infinitely, to really do something. For us, this is wild and abnormal, for them it is quite acceptable. So, it is meaningless to talk with the current official authorities in Minsk: everything will get bogged down in empty “allied” chatter. At the same time, the same authorities will actively build bridges and bridges "to the west".
Strangely, such an accusation sounds that, they say, Russia does not respect the sovereignty of the Republic of Belarus. It is very strange: it was just that Russia respected very strongly and tried with all its might to negotiate with Minsk. Actively subsidized the economy and hoped for the best. But everything ended in a very sad way: Belarus is increasingly politically drifting towards Europe, while the economy is falling apart, debts and popular discontent are growing. And politically speaking, the most profitable for Russia is to distance itself. Lukashenko was not a “Kremlin puppet,” and he also did not want to become an ally of Russia. Or was Russia supposed to organize an Ostmaydan in Minsk? Belarusian elites ruled the country as God put them at heart. Now they are at a dead end. Appealing to Russia in this situation has two meanings: the first is to try to make money, the second is to try to make Russia “extreme” in the internal disassembly in Belarus.
Once again, for those who did not understand: those who are sitting in Minsk, and not in the Kremlin, should be responsible for the current situation in the Belarusian economy. There is nothing to answer, so begin the "mysterious hints" at the "threat from the east." In fact, this step today Minsk is not very profitable, but the preparation was done just for that! It is clear that for any request from the Belarusian leadership, Moscow puts forward counterclaims (including political ones), which is absolutely unacceptable for modern Belarusian society (it was propagandized so much!). Therefore, immediately follows the accusations of dictation and immediately sent next emissaries to the West.
Something similar we have already seen in Ukraine. No, it is possible and necessary to help, but to specific pro-Russian politicians and political forces. Where are they in Belarus? I understand that “the main friend of Russia”, as well as the main agronomist, the main breeder and so forth, and so on, is Lukashenko. Officially. Russia is no longer satisfied with this “glavdrug”, categorically. And no one else is and can not be? Well then, sorry. Last year, the Belarusian elites were very clearly demonstrated that Moscow no longer bet on Lukashenko and does not intend to bet. "Resolve" this issue will not work. This help policy will no longer be categorically.
That is, as we all understand, Lukashenko is not going to go anywhere (not for that “power pyramid” lined up), the crisis is growing, and Moscow has no longer any interests to save the “best ally”. There are gigantic problems in Belarus, but This is exactly the Belarusian problem, which has nothing to do with Russia. Something like Ukraine: you can postpone the necessary reforms for a very long time, but sooner or later the accumulated problems “explode”. But what does Russia have to do with it? The Maidan in Kiev was an intra-Ukrainian event (albeit supported "from abroad"), and not "a response to Russian aggression." Although Russia is very actively trying to “tie” to inside Ukrainian events.
In winter 2013 / 2014 Kiev, there were no pro-Russian forces. How could we win / lose? The same applies to future internal clashes in Belarus: their cause is not the wrong external course, namely the accumulated (and unsolvable) internal problems. Myths about the "pro-Russian but father" and some dark "pro-Western forces" are good for the most naive readers. Russia is definitely affected by the changes in the political balance of Minsk, and it is an “interested person”, but not the main actor on the Belarusian political stage.
Today, both the authorities and the opposition in Belarus are actively demonstrating their readiness to “fight for independence” from some “dark external forces”. This pose is heroic. Moreover, on the part of Russia, it is completely useless to explain or prove something. There is a big political game going on ... And neither the government nor the opposition are in it on the side of Russia ... But they both are ready to use the image of “bad Russia”. Nothing like? For some reason, in our modern Minsk, it is unprofitable to be “pro-Russian” from the domestic political point of view. Strange, because like “the best ally” and like different political forces must compete in who is the best friend of Moscow ... so to speak participate in the “contest of elephants”: “the Belarusian elephant is the best friend of the Russian elephant”. But there is something completely different. Belarusian politicians categorically do not want to show any loyalty to Russia, because today it does not raise the rating. At the same time, some "secret negotiations" on oil and gas are underway ...
From the Russian point of view, all these “intra-Belarusian” squabbles are of little interest: both the president / MIA / KGB, and the “oppa” / “zmagars”, and even honest citizens consider Crimea to be Ukrainian, Tskhinval to be Georgian, and Zakharchenko to be a separatist. Well, what can they be interesting to Moscow? Do you want Russia to be on your side? Nothing is easier! To do this, you just have to be on the side of Russia ... Is this impossible? Well then your problems are your problems.
In general, Lukashenko’s current throwings are painfully reminiscent of the deathbed political convulsions of the “best president of Ukraine”. Both of them had a “vicious circle”: Moscow’s help is needed, but it’s impossible to be politically oriented towards it. From here such uneven, sharp movements. And again: initially, both in Kiev and in Minsk, there was a choice - whether to pursue a Russophobic or Russophile policy, then then there was no such choice. Yanukovych did not have it in the winter 2013 / 2014. Lukashenko does not have it today. What is the difference: Yanukovych as a cautious and intelligent man, in and of itself could come to his senses and replay. Lukashenko himself does not want that, and the people are really pro-Russian politics will not support (that is, the policy should be labeled “pro-Russian”, but be sovereign-pro-Western). Therefore, to wait for such a "miracle of insight" is useless. Maidan remains ...
And about the negotiations on “cheap gas for Slavic brothers,” an ancient anecdote comes to mind ... just change names.
- Abram, could you give 100 rubles in debt to a friend, before the payday?
- Of course I could, Haim. Unfortunately, I have no friends.
- Oleg Egorov
- cdn2.img.ria.ru
- Belarusian myths
Assertive Yankees in the Swamps of Polissya
Shards of Empire
Friendship with Minsk on gas
Russia and Belarus: translation problems
Information