Belarusan authorities have faced a new threat — an economic crisis that cannot be resolved by a mere thaw in relations with the West.

“The actions of militia not only went beyond reasonable but also beyond moral limits: instead of capturing criminals it is busy with something incomprehensible”. This is the way how Uladzimir Matskevich, the head of the Board of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, commented upon the attempt of the Central Police Department of Minsk to get explanations about his presence in Kastryčnickaja Square on October 11.

However, the regime doesn’t only have grounds but also has no need to launch repressions; the authorities will rather try to involve certain economists in cooperation in order to demonstrate the society the attempts to fight the crisis.

Uladzimir Matskevich answered the questions of the EuroBelarus Information Service.

— What events did you take part in on October 11 so that the militia got such a keen interest in you?

— You see, I didn’t really participated in any events since I don’t think that something extraordinary happened back then in Kastryčnickaja Square. As far as I understand, young guys marched from Svabody Square to Kastryčnickaja Square, just where I saw them. I approached them and some journalists interviewed me. I assume that the militia tracked me from these interviews: I saw neither militia nor intelligent services in the Square. I.e. my interviews were tracked down; I was recognized from a photo or a video — it wasn’t hard to ascertain my presence in the Square. However, the very fact makes me indignant: can you imagine what is happening if the militia tracks down video in mass media, especially legal mass media, such as, for example, Radio Liberty? The actions of militia not only went beyond reasonable but also beyond moral limits: instead of capturing criminals it is busy with something incomprehensible.

— Did the story get a continuation? You directed your appeal to the head of the Central Police Department of Minsk with a number of questions; but have you got the answers?

— For now there is no continuation.

I haven’t been subpoenaed; my wife called me and gave me a phone number — that’s it. I am not obliged to obey to a useless scrap of paper, all the more to go to militia myself. Having not violated anything and having not taken part in anything illegal I don’t feel any guilt and I am not obliged to fulfill unreasonable demands of militia.

I have really written a sarcastic appeal to the head of the Central Police Department of Minsk without even knowing his name. What continuation will the story get? I hope they’ll laugh at it themselves and will close the topic.

— But the actions of militia not only went beyond reasonable but also beyond moral limits...

— There is nothing new in it. A number of facts prove that: the situation with the arrests of football fans, the tracked-down photo of cadets in t-shirts with “Pahonia” are links in one chain that we have already observed during the presidential campaign.

— As far back as on October 11 Lukashenko has warned the opposition: liberalization ends at 8 p.m. Indeed, there’s no need to pretend to be a kind man: the “election” is over, and international organizations have quite mildly evaluated the pre-election atmosphere in the country. Life continues, though goes downhill: according to the Swedish Bank “Credit Suisse”, Belarus is the second poorest country in Europe. How will the authorities behave after the “end of democracy”?

— There was no democracy, but only a false performance played out before and during “elections”. Even in the Soviet times, when no one played at democracy and the election was uncontested, in the army on the election day everyone forgot about the army discipline for several hours.

We shouldn’t connect normalization of relations with the Belarusan regime that is now unfolding in the world politics with this “election” — neither with terms of their organization nor with the liberalization. Normalization of relations with the Belarusan regime is built at one simple rational factor: since there are no hopes to change the nature of the regime and there are no forces that are able to change it, it means that normal relations with this regime should be built, just as normal trade and economic relations are built with Cuba and North Korea if needed.

By the way, it is a quite rational and sound stance of the international community that serves for the welfare of the people that are occupied by dictator regimes. Any attempts to interpret the international politics such as legitimation of the regime or lowering the requirements towards the dictator are inadmissible; they are silly. Just as it is silly to count on the revolution in Belarus or Internet maps, according to which Belarus is the second poorest European country. It is not so, because even in the EU there are countries that are poorer than Belarus in fact. Far-fetched facts only harm the processes of society establishment in Belarus and processes of building politically conscious part of the society and invent flaws and mistakes that are non-typical for the regime. It is a populist regime, whish cares a lot for preventing the social explosion in the country and does everything for that.

There are economic difficulties and problems, but not only Belarus is in crisis. We need to be realistic and understand that the attitude of European politicians towards the Belarusan dictatorship didn’t change a bit — it is a realistic realpolitik: if there are no changes in Belarus and no opportunity to change the regime democratically, peacefully or in any other way, then good neighborly relations with this regime should be built.

— Each previous presidential campaign ended in crackdown. Will this “election” be an exception from the rule?

— Crackdown and repressions after the previous “election” happened for rational reasons: Belarusan regime was finishing off the opposition that it has basically destroyed after 2006 campaign. After that the regime had no opportunity to account its slips at the expense of the opposition; the opposition has become so weak that it couldn’t help the regime. The dissolved groups that remained before 2010 but were unable to agree between themselves were killed by repressions. The “tolerant” part of the opposition was intimidated; all candidates were discredited by the information about their cooperation with the KGB that leaked out to mass media. Now a label of doubt in sincerity lies on many leaders that were taking part in 2010 campaign. There is no trust to them anymore.

Well, in 2015 the opposition didn’t take part in the “election” at all! Dzmitryeu, Karatkevich, the whole “Tell the Truth!” campaign have no relation to the opposition — these are collaborators, who agreed to cooperate with the regime and played (not very successfully) the role of the opposition in the eyes of the naïve citizens. There were no calls for protests so the regime has no need to launch a crackdown. Law enforcement agencies rather work mechanically; cause even the group of people that gathered in the evening of October 11 didn’t present any protest force.

Moreover, the regime now faces some absolutely different tasks. It has to do something with the approaching economic crisis. Despite the normalization of relations with Europe, deepening of crisis is inevitable due to close ties of not only our economic, but also a part of our social life with Russia. Until sanctions against Russia are lifted and Russian economy escapes stagnation we will be losing markets, facing the payments crisis, and the growth of payables and receivables among the companies and firms that are working with Russia. Aggravation of economic situation cannot be fixed by mere warming in relations with the West. Radical economic reforms are required; and the regime isn’t ready for them. Understanding that it can’t stand the weight of social programs, the regime is put before the need to look for a way-out from the crisis. I don’t know what it’s going to invent; perhaps, it will recruit some economists to start cosmetic reforms so that to demonstrate that it is at least trying to fight the crisis.

We should rather expect that some economists are involved to cooperation than that repressions will be launched.