On March 8, one of the leaders of the Belarusian opposition Svetlana Tikhanovskaya Meeting with US President Joe Biden, stressing that Washington "currently pays attention to Belarus." This happened against the background of the criticism of US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken in the address of the Belarusian authorities, and the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko in the "dictatorship". What policies will adhere to the United States in relation to the Belarusian opposition, and what forces will be betting by Washington, in an interview with Eurasia.Expert, a political scientist-American Dmitry Drobkhnitsky told.
- Dmitry Olegovich, what does Joe Biden Svetlana Tikhanovskaya be achieved from meeting with US president of USA?
- This is such a long-standing tradition: any non-systemic liberal opposition sooner or later becomes the client of the "Big Western authorities". This, alas, is already just the law of nature. Everything is simple here: Even if a person is very sincere democrat, sooner or later he has to choose - either he somehow thinks about the sovereign development of his own country, or not to conflict with a large "democratic" authority in Washington, which everything subordinates himself.
All conversations about the western type of democracy in a sense are not correct in a sense, because Western democracy, as we see in 2020, very bright is a way to manage the liberal elite. In order for this elite to continue to manage, it does not matter if there are right and fair elections and counting votes, there is a free press. Thus, to everyone who preserves or illusion or quite reasonably does it, you have to go to the carpet to the global authorities, nothing is surprising here.
- Are the requirements of Svetlana Tikhanovskaya in the USA satisfy? What could be the reaction of the American administration?
"They will plunge on the head, say:" Well done, let's go further. " Everything will depend exclusively from those plans that are being built in the State Department in relation to the countries closest to Russia. These plans are not fully braced, but in general everything will depend on it.
It can be seen that as soon as the administration of Byyden was coming to the White House, the amount of financing of various kinds of opposition was very much increased everywhere.
If before everything that the State Department was able to hide from Trump, he threw for these purposes (Trump did not really like to finance democracy abroad), now, of course, the gateways opened, the money flowed. But some terribly straightly organized attack has not yet been, although we have seen the most unpleasant manifestations in Belarus, in Russia and so on. I think that serious pressure and serious attacks are still ahead.
- On March 8, in the course of the ceremony, the merit of activists of all over the world US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken called President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko "The last dictator of Europe". Does this mean the transition to the final frost of Washington relations with official Minsk?
- First, the name "The last dictator of Europe" is not new, it originated in the Clinton administration and then very actively during the administration of Obama was uttered. Apparently, Alexander Lukashenko, at his time there was some illusion that the Trump administration, as the administration, is sufficiently pragmatic, will carry out contact with him, and she really did it when Pompeo traveled, and that due to this it would be possible to maintain multi-vector. It is clear that even then it was not a particularly working scheme, but now - all the more. Now, if the contacts of the authorities are held, then in the Kremlin, it will have to think firmly about the fact that Alexander Lukashenko hesitated again, but in fact it will not end for him for him anyway.
The problem is that the time when it was possible with the help of a certain balance between two centers of force something for themselves to twist. And Russia is increasingly more difficult to endure multipleboard in their borders - it does not contribute to national security.
- Does this mean that the relations of the United States and the Belarusian authorities will deteriorate again?
- I think, yes, according to pragmatic considerations. Still, the pragmatists in the Democrats are less - they have clear ideological projects and goals in this case. What did Pompeo wanted? He just had to see if China would not go to Belarus earlier than the United States, everything else was extremely uninteresting for him. Belarus is a completely defined border of the Western world, and it must be subordinate to the interests of the West. How can she be subordinate to the interests of the West? It is clear that through the loss of sovereignty, through the rupture of relations with Russia, the separation of it from the possible strengthening of the influence of Moscow.
This is all considered this way, so I do not know how there is about short-term improvement, if you suddenly, Alexander Lukashenko wants to play global democracy, then maybe it will be, but it will end very quickly and bad. Therefore, the general line is very simple - to tear off, break and destroy statehood. I think that to finance the second draft of the exhibition-indicative exhibition Slavic state, as I tried to do so, by the way, the administration in 2014 will not be due to the obvious fault of this kind of project. Therefore, they will simply break and subordinate without any games into some kind of exemplary liberal state.
- What strategy will adhere to the United States in relation to the Belarusian opposition? Who will the bet be on?
- Now the American administration has in general and their subordinates from the European Commission have serious claims to liberal opposition in the post-Soviet space, because they could not do anything substantially. Now there will be some revision of tactics. A lot of money will be allocated for this case. In the US, there is such an illusion that, if you allocate a lot of money, everything will turn out.
In any case, the pressure will increase. Now the only thing that can be said is that the point here is not even in the split of the opposition (this is a consequence), and the case is simply in the global disappointment of the authorities in the liberal opposition, which in the post-Soviet space is today.
And then they will do next - see. Now it is now clear that in the post-Soviet space plans are still melted.
- In the event that the spring in Belarus will resume protest shares, then what will be the US response?
- The question is how they will support them - purely rhetorically ("We are with you" and so on) or it will be some kind of technical great help in coordination. The level of support is very dependent on what plans will be built in the White House, how they see it all the matter. To date, there is a certain kind of confusion, which is related to the fact that any goals all these shares in Belarus have not yet reached somewhere, and in this sense it is clear that the tactic will be revised. If people come out, then will certainly support how else. Many representatives of the State Department will tell their right words, but the real question of support will be resolved depending on which tactics will be accepted.
- Recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko took place in Sochi, where the leaders of the countries discussed the strengthening of military cooperation, returned to the topic of "road maps" of in-depth integration in the Union State. Will it affect US politics?
- The US policy and in general west with respect to Belarus and any other country in Russia is changed only if our strategy will change in the post-Soviet space. To date, there is no feeling that the strategy is seriously changed.
In Russia, this is the case that these are their sovereign choice, and until then the situation will remain the same. Everything changes only at the moment when it will be said that this is the zone of the influence of Moscow. Not "We welcome the sovereign choice of Belarus", and "This is the zone of the influence of Moscow." And at this moment everything will change, and until that time the same will happen. As practice shows (Ukrainian, for example) at some point, something can break, and at some point the Western forces can do something. Again, the same nuland will arrive at some square, the cookies will distribute, and there they already have the money. The scheme is known - when the power begins to weaken, something is happening. In this sense, I would at the location of Alexander Lukashenko, I did not imagine. He has already exhaled and decided that he was saved, and in fact it continues all this, and there is no salvation in multi-vector. While Russia will continue to support this multipleness, countries from its nearest environment will continue from it, in spite of any assurances in friendship, peace and all other things.
Announced Maria Mamzelkina