CC BY
15
THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS: THE SEARCH FOR A NEW STRATEGY OF THE COUNTRY'S DEVELOPMENT
Dzmitry Brukhavetski
Summary
During the year 2011 the main content of the activities of the Administration of the President was the search for a new strategy of the republic's development in the context of increasing political pressure from the side of Russia and the crisis of the Belarusian socially oriented model. The main instrument for short-term situation stabilization became the strengthening of the "manual" regulating the economic and political processes in the country. Understanding the impossibility of the further existence of the "socially oriented" economy with lack of financial resources the Administration of the President prepared the ground for undertaking a number of unpopular measures by the government. For this purpose a "conflict" between the "market economy adherents" in the government and "conservatives" in the AP was initiated. The desirable result of this "conflict" would be the "shock therapy" in economy ("the victory of the market economy adherents") and following significant resignations in the government. Efficient maneuvering by an experienced public administrator Mr. M.V. Miasnikovich prevented that such a scenario would become a reality last year.
At the same time, the AP significantly increased its control over public officials, "cleaned up" the political field in the country, and initiated the discussions about the possible reform of the political system in Belarus.
Trends:
• The AP continues to pressurize the government in order to impel it to unpopular social and economic measures;
• The policy of crackdown on public officials and civil society is being continued;
• The Administration of the President will initiate very limited and mostly formal changes broadly presented as the "reforms" of the Belarusian political system.
Changes in personnel
The Administration of the Republic of Belarus is a public agency which supports the activities of the President of the Republic of Belarus in the sphere of the public administration personnel policy, the ideology of the Belarusian state, and law, as well as in the
sphere of preparing, implementing and control the implementations of the decisions made by the President of the Republic of Belarus.
As a result of a very wide range of powers belonged to the President of the Republic of Belarus, who according to the Constitution, "mediates between the public administration agencies", it is not always possible to clearly distinguish President's activities from the activities of his Administration and the policy conducted in the country. Nevertheless, it is possible to distinguish a number of peculiarities and trends which became apparent in 2011 and which characterize the place of the Administration of the President in the system of public administration in the Republic of Belarus in this period.
In 2011 important personnel changes took place in the Administration of the President which were formally connected with the beginning of Mr. A. Lukashenko's new presidential term and traditional personnel rotation. The changes in the highest echelon of the AP took place during the whole 2011 year (recent appointments — Mr. A. Tur as the Deputy Head of the AP and Mr. A. Kobiakov as the Ambassador of Belarus to Russia — took place in October), indicating more serious reasons for them.
The main personnel changes took place in the line "the Administration of the President — the Government", i. e. it was strengthening the Government with the former high-ranking officials from the AP and the AP with the former members of the Government. The most noticeable appointment was the change of the First Deputy Head of the AP - from Mrs. N. Petkevich to Mr. M. Radkov. The dismissal of Mrs. N. Petkevich took the form of disgrace: for a long period she was out of a job and demeaning materials about her attempts to find a job at "Priorbank" appeared in mass-media. Unexpectedly for everyone, In September 2011 Mrs. Natalya Petkevich was appointed as a President's assistant and took the place of Mr. V. Matveychuk, who resigned.
The dismissal of Mrs. N. Petkevich suggests that the Head of the State was not satisfied by the work of the informational and ideological authorities including their work during his electoral campaign. Also, the rivalry between Mrs. N. Petkevich and Mr. V. Yanchevsky, a President's assistant and the head of the Chief Ideological Department, played a certain role.
Among the Belarusian officials, Mr. A. Radkov is known as a convinced supporter of the policy implemented in the country. In
spite of his status as a civil servant, he is the head of the pro-presidential non-governmental association "Belaya Rus". During the electoral campaign, he was the head of Mr. A. Lukashenko's electoral staff. The appointment of Mr. A. Radkov was not only a reward for his contribution to the President's victory, but also a strengthening of the "manual" regulation which is actively supported by the former ministry of education.
Nevertheless, it should be clear that in contrast to other public agencies where the first deputy head makes a counterbalance to agency's head, in the Administration of the President the first deputy head is mainly a technical representation that can not be an equal adversary neither to Mr. V. Makey nor to the key President's assistants.
The appointments of Mr. A. Kalinin (former assistant of the President, the chief inspector of Minsk city) as a deputy head of the Government responsible for communal services, Mr. A. Kobiakov (former deputy head of the Government, in October 2011 appointed as the Ambassador to Russia) as a deputy head of the AP, Mr. L. Anfimov (former deputy head of the AP) as the first deputy chairman of the State control Committee and Mr. A. Tur (former ministry of the economy) as a deputy head of the AP were among other important personnel changes.
All these appointments prove on the one hand the increasing influence of the AP on the Government and on the other hand — the increasing professionalism of the AP itself in the economic sphere (Mr. A. Tur, Mr. A. Kobiakov). During the currency crisis in the country the AP publicly acted quite helplessly, continually discrediting Mr. A. Lukashenko and Mr. V. Makey with their populist statements about the inevitable strengthening of the ruble and stubbornly refusing to dismiss the Head of the Board of the National Bank Mr. P. Prokopovich.
The Administration of the President vs. the Government
After the rapid economic recession in spring-summer, the second half of 2011 was marked by discussions in the Belarusian informational space about the confrontation between "the conservatives" (the adherents of the former economic policy from the Administration of the President) and "the market reforms adherents" from the Governments. A vice head of the Government Mr. S. Rumas and
the prime-minister himself Mr. M. Miasnikovich were named among the latter ones.
This conflict didn't have only behind-the-scene character. For example, at the Government's meeting on November 8, the dispute was raised between a President's assistant Mr. S. Tkachiov on the one hand and Mr. M. Miasnikovich and Mr. S. Rumas on the other hand. On November 10, Mr. A. Lukashenko publicly supported Mr. S. Tkachiov with the statement about inadmissibility to revise the tasks set during the IV All Belarusian people's assembly. The President spoke in public with similar statements during the whole year 2011, constantly criticizing the Government and the National Bank and carefully presenting himself as the sole defender of the achievements of the "socially oriented" Belarusian economy from the horrors of the market economy.
It seems that all this "confrontation" mainly had an artificial character and was organized by the Administration of the President itself. It is obvious that the latter one had the forecasts on the negative development of the financial and economic sector of the republic in 2011 and took the necessary steps to protect the image of Mr. A. Lukashenko. The appointment of Mr. M. Miasnikovich, who was supposed to become responsible for the economic problems in the country, apparently aimed to discredit the former soviet elite and to weaken its positions in the possible elite coup.
The second but not less important aim was seriously reforming the Belarusian "socially oriented" model which can not exist in statu quo ante without sufficient financial resources. In spite of Mr. A. Lukashenko's statements there are reasonable arguments to believe that the high ranking officials of the country are planning to decrease the already low level of the social protection of ordinary Belarusians. Taking into consideration the unpopularity of the new policy and even the possibility of the social outbreak this reforming had to be carried out by hands of the others, i.e. by the hands of the Government.
With this end in view not only "the reformers" who were supposed to take the blame upon themselves but a number of officials that are absolutely loyal to the President and responsible for the controlling over the most sensitive spheres of the social system (housing construction, communal services, salaries and labor conditions) were included in the Government. One of the most loyal and disciplined members of the Government we can consider Mr. A. Tozik who after taking the post of a deputy head of the Govern-
ment became famous with his proposals to tighten the state social policy: to increase the period of compulsory career assignment for graduated students, to increase the pension age, to repeal benefits for entering the universities, to finance social programs "selectively", to work as "Chinese", "to load" children at schools with work and etc. The prime-minister Mr. M. Miasnikovich, an experienced and influential public administrator, during the whole year 2011 and with all possible means, was resisting the attempts to make himself "a reformer" and a creator of the "market oriented" Belaru-sian model of development. That is why the conflict between the Administration of the President and the Government was not the conflict between "the market economy adherents" and "the conservatives" but it is rather explained by state officials' desire to make each other responsible for making extremely unpopular decisions.
"The ghost" of political reforms: tightening control over the state officials
During the whole year 2011, the views of different experts about possible elite coup circulated in the informational space of the country. The reasons of this coup, in their opinion, were to become the general destabilization of the social and economic situation and the penetration of Russian investments that threaten the interests of the state enterprises' directors who enjoy significant influence in Belarus. The possibility of street unrests of the ordinary Belarusians also represented a serious danger to the regime.
The Administration of the President considered these risks to be very serious. Two strategies were simultaneously used for their neutralization: on the one hand tightening control and repressive measures, on the other hand - introducing the idea about the necessity of partial reforms in the political system of the country. The control was tightened not only over the civil society but also over the public officials. The establishment of the Committee of Inquiry which greatly restricted the activities of all security agencies can be considered the most serious measure. The Head of this Committee which is directly responsible to the Presidents and in such way to his Administration became Mr. V. Vakulchik, the former head of the Operational and Analytical Centre and a person extremely loyal to the Belarusian leader. The Administration of the President took immediate and strict action, reacting on any sign of hesitation among the high ranking officials and took necessary steps
for restricting their influence. For example, the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Forces and Air Defense Forces Mr. I. Azarionak was arrested and sentenced to prison, the decree "On some issues of local governing and self-governing" was signed by the President; the General Prosecutor was changed; the control over the judicial system was tightened; the power of the governors (heads of the provinces) to distribute lands in rural areas was restricted; the system of territorial defense was strengthened; significant and sometimes scandalous staff changes in the Ministries of Justice and Internal Affairs occurred.
The discussions about the necessity of changes in the country's policy were continuing in different forms during the whole year 2011. After long hesitations, the year 2011 was declared "the Year of Enterprise". The Administration of the President attempted to carry out a number of huge campaigns of a somewhat populist character focusing on monitoring the treatment by local authorities of the appeals from citizens and the situation with respect to labor discipline. The downright negative reactions of the people that followed these measures confirmed the opinion of high ranking officials about the necessity of at least external transformations. Nevertheless, during the whole year the Administration of the President did not succeed in elaborating a more or less acceptable plan for political reforms or even to sketch the outlines of such a reform.
Conclusion
The crisis of the Belarusian socially oriented model stipulated the search for a new strategy of the country's development as the main challenge of AP's activities. This search didn't lead to any significant success. The country's political elite didn't succeed in elaborating an acceptable plan for economic and political reforms or even to sketch the outlines of such a reform. The result was a tactical emphasis on the "manual" regulating the economic and political processes in the country.
Alongside with it, the Administration of the President tightened the control over the public officials, "cleaned up" the political field of the country and initiated discussions about the possibility of reforms in the political system of Belarus. It is strongly believed that next year these discussions will be practically finished, though very insignificant changes mostly of external and formal character are possible.
