Belarus predicted the fate of the new "Anti-Russia"

6
It is no secret that since the collapse of the USSR, in all its former republics, except Russia, a course has been taken towards the construction of "developed" nationalism. In multinational Russia, the construction of a mononational state could not occur in principle, since this leads to the destruction of statehood as such.



However, in all other republics of the former USSR, the only way not to become part of the “empire” after a while was to generate “patriotism” with local flavor, which was greatly facilitated by the West. Therefore, the issues discussed by Russian political scientists regarding the prospects of creating a full-fledged Union State of Russia and Belarus (SGRB) are of particular interest.

Of course, many of the conclusions presented below seem controversial, but there is such a point of view that Belarus risks repeating the fate of Ukraine if it refuses to continue rapprochement with Russia within the framework of the SGRB. Indeed, in Belarus, processes similar to those that took place in Ukraine before the “revolution of dignity” are now observed. In any case, this was stated by Igor Shishkin, deputy director of the Institute of the CIS countries, on TV Day TV.

If you look at all this not from the point of view of statistics, but in dynamics, then, unfortunately, now events are developing so that if you do not change anything and leave the Union State in the current format, then after a certain number of years in Belarus it will be the same that is now in Ukraine. The process is going in the same direction

- said Shishkin.

According to Shishkin, independent Belarus will gradually turn into "Anti-Russia", as happened in Ukraine. Therefore, he calls on states (Russia and Belarus) to more actively develop allied relations and not be afraid of this, emphasizing that even between the closest friends there are contradictions and trade problems, but they can be resolved at the negotiating table.


It should be recalled that in December 2018, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev announced the fundamental readiness of Moscow to implement the Program of Action and all the clauses of the Treaty on the Establishment of the State Reserves Fund of December 8, 1999 (ratified by both parties and entered into force on January 26, 2000), including education unified customs service, court, Court of Accounts and other joint supranational bodies. It is difficult to predict which way Minsk will choose.
6 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Digital error
    Digital error
    +1
    10 March 2019 14: 24
    Voluntarily, Lukashenko will not share the power, and due to his age, he will remain about 10 years old. If in 10 years (specifically until 2024, then he will not be interested in the authorities of the Russian Federation again), the scenario of the SGRB will not be realized, then the Ukrainian scenario will become uncontested.
    1. Victor N
      Victor N
      +1
      11 March 2019 14: 58
      The scenario with the union state is unpromising: there is no creative pro-Russian politician. Another thing is even worse: the Belarusian economy is rapidly fading and now without Russia it is already not viable, its attractiveness tends to zero. And in Russia there are more and more pragmatists who consider reunification a burden. It seems that time has already been lost, while Belarus will clarify the real self-esteem, it will become undesirable for Russia.
  2. mr.son4927
    mr.son4927
    +2
    11 March 2019 13: 57
    I can’t believe in a real union. For residents of Belarus, of various nationalities, this would be an undoubted blessing, if only because it would remove the gigantic burden of Belarus’s debts to Russia. But who and when thinks of ordinary citizens? No one. But for power structures this association will mean only one thing - their loss of power or the share of power that they have now. Therefore, Lukashenko will be removed in any situation, as soon as the steps to unite are drawn.
    But it’s not worth worrying about Lukashenko, for he is in fact one of the main opponents of the unification of Belarus and Russia.
  3. Bulanov
    Bulanov
    +1
    11 March 2019 14: 27
    The sooner the restoration of nation states begins in the EU, the sooner the EU will stop interfering in Russia's affairs. England in this case lives in a glass house, and there is nothing for it to throw stones at.
  4. Vyacheslav Moscow
    Vyacheslav Moscow
    +2
    11 March 2019 17: 03
    There was no and there is no union state of Russia - Belarus. Lukashenko simply wanted to replace Yeltsin in the presidency of Russia, for which such a game was arranged not without the participation of our communists. With the advent of Putin, the plans of the collective farmer collapsed, but somehow you need to save face, so he tries to portray himself as a brother and friend of the entire Russian people. It’s getting worse every day. But I do not want to part with the power, my son would pass it on. And Syabram in Europe wants more and more. They are "waiting." And the fate of them, the former Soviet republics, is one, anti-Russian. If Russia refuses to contain any of them, then it’s an enemy. And Ukraine is not the first here.
  5. Oleg RB
    Oleg RB
    +1
    12 March 2019 10: 22
    Of course, many of the conclusions presented below seem controversial, but there is such a point of view that Belarus risks repeating the fate of Ukraine if it refuses to continue rapprochement with Russia within the framework of the SGRB.

    - but not vice versa? wink -
    Any attempt at major integration will result in the Ukrainian scenario?
    Perhaps the author does not know just the realities of ordinary Belarusians: what do students think and what are pensioners? What do telezombies and not telezombies think? What do they think in the Brest region, and what in the Vitebsk? And so on and so forth .... here a civil war can break out worse than Ukrainian.
    One thing can save from it - the notorious passivity "or maybe so," but not a fact.