Belarusans refuse to trust the President and the government; however, people expect actions from them.

According to latest social poll conducted by the Independent Institute for Social, Economic and Political Studies (IISEPS) it is for the first time in 2013 that the share of those distrusting Mr. Lukashenko exceeded the share of those trusting him: 47,5 percent versus 37,7 percent compared with 43,2 percent versus 43,4 percent in March, 40.6 percent versus 48,9 percent in June and 36,7 percent versus 46,7 percent in September. Lukashenko’s re-election rating dropped considerably as well: it was 29,7 in June 2012, 31,5 percent in December, 33,4 percent in March 2013, 37,3 percent in June, and 42,6 percent in September 2013; but in December 2013 only 34,8 percent of Belarusans were ready to vote for Alexander Lukashenko.

Andrei Yahorau, the Director of Centre for European Transformation, in the interview with the EuroBelarus Information Service discusses Lukashenko’s rating and situation in the Belarusan society.

— What has caused another loss of confidence in the Belarusan leader and drop of his rating?

— The President’s rating depends on the material welfare and people’s expectation of a crisis. Now the crisis anticipation is growing so the reaction of Belarusans is adequate: they blame the government and the President for the current and expected problems. Naturally, the rating of the authorities is falling down.

— Sociologists have long noted the undulating character of Lukashenko’s rating. There are always rises and falls, while his policy does not particularly change: this is an evident authoritarianism in all its forms. Why does his rating jump up and down if nothing changes in the country?

— It is the general political conditions in the country that remains the same, but the economic component is constantly changing. People are not particularly interested in the general political situation, but they pay attention to the fact that ruling power neither improves their lives nor increases the well-being. Up to 2011 the current regime could ensure a normal standard of living, but today the authorities are not able to do it. People assess the power in accordance with their economic conditions.

— Together with the fall of Lukashenko’s rating the respondents state the deteriorating economic situation. The direct link between the population’s growing incomes and Lukashenko’s rating is obvious. Since January till August 2013 the real wages of the population grew by nearly 20per cent, in September Lukashenko’s rating reached 43 per cent and the confidence in him increased up to 47 per cent. It turns out that the rating corresponds to the amount of money in the population’s pocket, doesn’t it?

— Generally speaking, it does. But it does not depend on the amount of money alone. The rating is also determined by the sense of stability and the expectations of either a stable or an unstable state. If nothing points to the worsening of the situation, people are tolerant to the current government. It is a typical tendency not only for Belarus, but for all civilized countries.

— But such an attitude may be interpreted in a different way as if we have actually become a nation of consumers for who there are no values left except for money. How does it characterize the state of Belarusan society?

— The main objective of any government is to ensure a satisfactory standard of life for the people, the growth of the quality of life, the multiplication of the national wealth. If a government is not able to perform its duties, in democratic countries people vote for a different government, for another party. They choose a new power capable to cope with its job.

In Belarus the situation is that there is no alternative power on the political arena; people do not see it. No matter how bad Belarusans feel about the government and president, they still stake on them — just because there is no other option. Even if Belarusans do not trust the current president and the distrust is constantly growing, they have no one to place their hopes in except for Lukashenko. It is a paradox.

According to the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, people may not feel the needs of the high level while they have more primitive needs. Primary or basic needs are safety, well-being, nutrition, family. People do not see the connection between the basic needs and the guarantee of freedom, democracy or human rights. Belarusans do not understand that their well-being is provided by the division of powers, by human rights and by democracy. Without this understanding people fulfill their basic needs: physiological needs (hunger, thirst, and sexual desire), security, the need for love and affection, and also the need to belong to a social group...

— Sergey Nikolyuk concluded that the symptoms of a crisis of the legitimacy of power are obvious, the situation reminds of the Soviet Union before perestroika. Do you personally see the crisis of the legitimacy of power?

— There is no crisis of the legitimacy. For the crisis to exist we need an alternative power, an alternative ideology. Belarusans do not have the possibility to change their political orientation, to turn to another side, because there is no choice. Who can lead the country out of the crisis? That is why Belarusans remain in an ambivalent state: they are discontented, but unable to change anything.

So we have what we have: we do not trust Lukashenko but no one else will lead the country out the crisis. Even if his rating is falling, there is still confidence in him. Lukashenko’s ratings have always balanced on such a level; nevertheless these numbers did not cause any disastrous consequences for the regime.

— Why the drop of the authorities’ popularity does not entail people’s desire for changes? Or maybe falling rating is only a signal for Lukashenko to urgently look for the money but not an indicator of the people’s consciousness growth?

— I agree that the rate drop is a signal for Lukashenko to act.

Why doesn’t the rate drop lead to actions causing changes in the country? The readiness for action depends on the political scene. Now on the political arena there is no alternative power ready for action supported by a strategy and knowledge. There is no such a force; there is no one to follow.

Belarusans refuse to trust the government and the President but they will expect them to act. Basing on the principle “we do not trust Lukashenko, but there is no one else to trust”.

— What does actually measure Lukashenko’s rating? And should we actually attach great importance to these numbers?

— We should watch how the rating changes, how the contrasting relations between the power and society alter, to what extent people conform to the current system of power and life.

But it is not the only factor according to which we may assess the state of the society and the state of the country.