Lukashenko refused to break with Russia
Recently in one of the leading online publications in Ukraine, where it is with great pleasure that a “tribune” is provided for any representatives of the “opposition movements” of neighboring Belarus who are fighting the “totalitarian Lukashenko regime”, very intriguing revelations were published. They shed light not only on some extremely poorly covered moments of Minsk’s internal political intrigues, but, and more importantly, on the prospects for further actions of the Belarusian leader in relations with Russia.
If you believe Natalya Radina, who is acting in this case as the source of information, who is the editor-in-chief of the Charter-97 portal, who acts as the main “mouthpiece” of Belarusian “fighters against the regime” of all stripes, between Lukashenko and those who sleep and dream about him overthrow, there was a kind of "attempt at dialogue." The date and format are not specified - Radina only indicated that the president was invited to "sit down at the negotiating table." Represented at such would be all the most prominent “oppositionists” of the country - such as candidate Nikolai Statkevich, former candidate for the presidency of Belarus Andrei Sannikov and others like them. The main feature that unites all these gentlemen is the dream that Belarus would fulfill in its external policy "180 degree turn". However, precisely this demand, according to the journalist, turned out to be categorically unacceptable to Lukashenko.
Apparently, the "opposition" initially offered the leader of the country a ready-made "scenario", acting according to which he was supposed to "get off the Russian needle," and, most importantly, "go closer to the West." All the accompanying talk: about "democratization", "return to freedom of speech" and other "positive changes in the country" that Minsk would carry out, "having received the support of the West", which would have previously turned to "for help", by and large, only distracting verbal chatter, unchanging ritual dance of the "democrats". The main thing that was required of Lukashenko was “to get out of Moscow’s influence”.
This “fateful action” should have been accompanied, according to the “saviors of Belarus” (or, rather, those who drafted and approved this “scenario” for them), with very specific things — the country's exit from the Union State, the dissolution of each and every military political treaties with Russia, and the like. Moreover, it was also about “rejecting Russian loans and energy resources”. What catastrophic consequences would this lead to the economy Belarusians who never stoop to such “mundane matters” liberal “intellectuals” do not even think. The main thing is freedom of speech and "democratization" ...
From the foregoing, it is easy to conclude that the "opposition" offered Lukashenko himself, his beloved ones, as mediators and negotiators for the most painless surrender to the West. Incidentally, some personal “guarantees” were also discussed for him. However, Alexander Grigorievich did not appreciate such an emotional impulse - according to Radina, he not only rejected the very idea of “opening the country to the West”, but did not want to have any conversations at all with the adherents of this idea. As Radina laments, “Lukashenko continued repression against the opposition - that was his answer!” Well - in this case, one can only be glad that the Belarusian leader had much more common sense than, in due time, his Ukrainian counterpart, Viktor Yanukovych. He just negotiated with the local "opposition", which had already managed to unleash the bloody "Maidan", openly supported by the West, by that time. And I got guarantees - nowhere to go! That's just everyone remembers how it all ended ...
And the fact that the Belarusian "fighters for democracy" are no different from the exact same "revolutionaries" who finally ruined Ukraine in 2014, there is no doubt for a moment. It’s enough to beat the fastidiousness, if only to glance over the electronic pages of the same “Charter” edited by Radina. The level of Russophobia and, as they say, caveman nationalism on these simply goes off scale, completely no different from the vile propaganda of modern Bandera. For example, one of the topics that is most worrying for the authors of the publication today is the appearance in Belarus of another unit of the Unarmia. They sound the alarm - it’s “the expansion of the Russian world blessed by Putin and Shoigu”! This audience is especially hated by the fact that the Russian ambassador in Minsk, Mikhail Babich, during a ceremony held at the Museum of the Great Patriotic War, spoke about the need to learn “the joint history of two peoples ... together defending their homeland and creating a big beautiful country”!
What a joint story ?! Those who dare to call themselves "Belarusian patriots", being, in fact, an inveterate nationalist rabble, have completely different views on this. Publishing a huge article on “ten military victories that Belarusians should be proud of”, the poisonous Charter-97 claims “four and a half centuries of full-scale wars with Muscovy”, and “Bolshevik and then Soviet genocide”! What is the "defense of the homeland"? What is one “big beautiful country” at all ?! A real Belarusian should honor the “heroes” who died for the interests of the Commonwealth or, at worst, “who fought with the Red Army”. From this “publication” and the “ideas” propagated by it, it’s a mile away from the burning tires of the “Maidan” ... And at the same time, by the specific “aromas” of the long uncleaned jackal of the cell.
Fortunately, the horror of the "triumph of the national idea" in a similar Ukrainian, blood-cannibal version, Belarus is not threatened today. Parting the new ambassador in Warsaw, Alexander Lukashenko, after assurances put in such cases that the Poles are “not a stranger’s people,” asked me to give them an urgent council “not to rattle with arms”. And at the same time he mentioned just the “joint Belarusian-Russian military group” with which the excessively hot panamas would have to deal otherwise. Well, for all the difficulties in relations between Moscow and Minsk, we don’t have to doubt the latter as a reliable military ally of Russia at the moment. And it pleases.
If you believe Natalya Radina, who is acting in this case as the source of information, who is the editor-in-chief of the Charter-97 portal, who acts as the main “mouthpiece” of Belarusian “fighters against the regime” of all stripes, between Lukashenko and those who sleep and dream about him overthrow, there was a kind of "attempt at dialogue." The date and format are not specified - Radina only indicated that the president was invited to "sit down at the negotiating table." Represented at such would be all the most prominent “oppositionists” of the country - such as candidate Nikolai Statkevich, former candidate for the presidency of Belarus Andrei Sannikov and others like them. The main feature that unites all these gentlemen is the dream that Belarus would fulfill in its external policy "180 degree turn". However, precisely this demand, according to the journalist, turned out to be categorically unacceptable to Lukashenko.
Apparently, the "opposition" initially offered the leader of the country a ready-made "scenario", acting according to which he was supposed to "get off the Russian needle," and, most importantly, "go closer to the West." All the accompanying talk: about "democratization", "return to freedom of speech" and other "positive changes in the country" that Minsk would carry out, "having received the support of the West", which would have previously turned to "for help", by and large, only distracting verbal chatter, unchanging ritual dance of the "democrats". The main thing that was required of Lukashenko was “to get out of Moscow’s influence”.
This “fateful action” should have been accompanied, according to the “saviors of Belarus” (or, rather, those who drafted and approved this “scenario” for them), with very specific things — the country's exit from the Union State, the dissolution of each and every military political treaties with Russia, and the like. Moreover, it was also about “rejecting Russian loans and energy resources”. What catastrophic consequences would this lead to the economy Belarusians who never stoop to such “mundane matters” liberal “intellectuals” do not even think. The main thing is freedom of speech and "democratization" ...
From the foregoing, it is easy to conclude that the "opposition" offered Lukashenko himself, his beloved ones, as mediators and negotiators for the most painless surrender to the West. Incidentally, some personal “guarantees” were also discussed for him. However, Alexander Grigorievich did not appreciate such an emotional impulse - according to Radina, he not only rejected the very idea of “opening the country to the West”, but did not want to have any conversations at all with the adherents of this idea. As Radina laments, “Lukashenko continued repression against the opposition - that was his answer!” Well - in this case, one can only be glad that the Belarusian leader had much more common sense than, in due time, his Ukrainian counterpart, Viktor Yanukovych. He just negotiated with the local "opposition", which had already managed to unleash the bloody "Maidan", openly supported by the West, by that time. And I got guarantees - nowhere to go! That's just everyone remembers how it all ended ...
And the fact that the Belarusian "fighters for democracy" are no different from the exact same "revolutionaries" who finally ruined Ukraine in 2014, there is no doubt for a moment. It’s enough to beat the fastidiousness, if only to glance over the electronic pages of the same “Charter” edited by Radina. The level of Russophobia and, as they say, caveman nationalism on these simply goes off scale, completely no different from the vile propaganda of modern Bandera. For example, one of the topics that is most worrying for the authors of the publication today is the appearance in Belarus of another unit of the Unarmia. They sound the alarm - it’s “the expansion of the Russian world blessed by Putin and Shoigu”! This audience is especially hated by the fact that the Russian ambassador in Minsk, Mikhail Babich, during a ceremony held at the Museum of the Great Patriotic War, spoke about the need to learn “the joint history of two peoples ... together defending their homeland and creating a big beautiful country”!
What a joint story ?! Those who dare to call themselves "Belarusian patriots", being, in fact, an inveterate nationalist rabble, have completely different views on this. Publishing a huge article on “ten military victories that Belarusians should be proud of”, the poisonous Charter-97 claims “four and a half centuries of full-scale wars with Muscovy”, and “Bolshevik and then Soviet genocide”! What is the "defense of the homeland"? What is one “big beautiful country” at all ?! A real Belarusian should honor the “heroes” who died for the interests of the Commonwealth or, at worst, “who fought with the Red Army”. From this “publication” and the “ideas” propagated by it, it’s a mile away from the burning tires of the “Maidan” ... And at the same time, by the specific “aromas” of the long uncleaned jackal of the cell.
Fortunately, the horror of the "triumph of the national idea" in a similar Ukrainian, blood-cannibal version, Belarus is not threatened today. Parting the new ambassador in Warsaw, Alexander Lukashenko, after assurances put in such cases that the Poles are “not a stranger’s people,” asked me to give them an urgent council “not to rattle with arms”. And at the same time he mentioned just the “joint Belarusian-Russian military group” with which the excessively hot panamas would have to deal otherwise. Well, for all the difficulties in relations between Moscow and Minsk, we don’t have to doubt the latter as a reliable military ally of Russia at the moment. And it pleases.
Information