Once again about the results of the All-Belorussian congress for the independence of Belarus.
1. 08. 2000 in the newspaper лSoviet Byelorussia╗ Katya Pryanik printed her article лAt the political kitchen not all pots cook ╗. Katya makes the references to my article devoted to the congress
лFor independence╗.
From this article it is clear that Valery Levonevsky is an ardent supporter of the present president of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko. Katya chose only separate words and citations from my article. I shall try to clear up the situation. The policy which is carried out by A. G. Lukashenko will result in complete poverty of people of Belarus and in loss of its independence, it is against the people on the essence. I thought and I think that A. G Lukashenko should apply for retirement as he does not coped with the duties and does not keep his promises.
Now A. Lukashenko is the leader of the country but it is only the matter of time. But it is not the great thing. How shall we pull out Belarus from the protracted economic crisis? I listened attentively to the speeches of the delegates of the All-Belorussian of congress лFor independence╗ and did not found in them the answer to all disturbing questions.
The present people who consider themselves to be the representatives of the opposition are not the same as a matter of fact and they incorrectly work in their attempts of counteraction to policy of A. Lukashenko.
Belarus should be the sovereign independent state. A geographical position of Belarus (the centre of Europe), large opportunities of reforming in the rather small country, intellectual potential, human and natural resources are a basis of the future reforms.
The independence of Belarus meets the interests of the majority of the citizens of the republic. The preservation of independence means that the people of Belarus will be the owner in the country and in the future they will solve their fate themselves. The independence is a freedom of choice of all people. In case of loss of the sovereignty, it can happen that all vital questions of Belarus will be solved in a capital of other state, and the people of Belarus can not affect these decisions any more. However it, perhaps, is the only thing in what I agree with the organisers and majority of the delegates of the congress лFor independence╗, on many other questions my point of view on problems of the people of Belarus is opposite.
On what questions our points of view do not coincide:
1. The organisers of the congress called it лAll-Belorussian", but is it so? What today are the Belorussian people? As though the representatives of the Belorussian National Front (BNF) did not say, 90 % - 85 % of the population of Belarus speak in the mixed Russian-Byelorussian language with an impurity of the Polish words. It is necessary to take the people as they are today and not as the leaders of BNF want to see them. I can not agree with the representatives of BNF who think that our people should speak Belorussian or they are damaged peple. All-Belorussian means that all people should present at it but at the congress all speeches were in the Belorussian language, and it is possible to make a conclusion that the delegates of congress presented a maximum 5-10 % of the population and the name лall- belorussian" does meet to the validity. If we take into account the structure of the delegates of the congress it will be possible to call it: лThe congress of the political figures and intelligentsia supporting BNF╗. To the representatives of other organisations the role Уof a crowdФ was given.
2. In the declaration is said: лwe stand for the kind equal in rights and mutually advantageous relations with all countries and especially with the neighbours: Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, LatviaЕ╗. I shall sign under such words with pure conscience, however in a preamble of this document the state (Russia) with which the authors of the declaration want to have лЕthe kind equal in rights and mutually advantageous relationsЕ╗ is called Уthe new aggressive empireФ. Moreover, among the delegates the edition under the name "Run" was distributed in which a Mr Vladimir Krukovsky has named Russia лShagrenevaya skin╗ and on a map separated Tataria, Bashkiria, Buryatiya, Yakutia and other national formations from Russia. About the attitude to Russia this "writer" writes: лOur east neighbour (Russia) always seemed to me as thick loud, lazy and unscrupulous woman who likes to drink a glass of vodka and to eat well, sing and dance╗ If such лfigures╗ really want to establish the kind relations with the neighbours, what for shall we soil in the next territory? What for shall we interfere with the internal businesses of the next state? The interethnic problems are and will be in many states. In England it is a problem of Northern Ireland, in Spain it is a problem of a province of basks, in Canada it is a problem of a province Kvebek, in Turkey it is a problem of Kurds. In Russia there a lot of such problems and if they will be solved on the Yugoslavian variant, the flame from the potentially possible conflict blazed up in a territory full of the nuclear weapon will reach Belarus. So the fiendish pleasure of Mr Krukovsky concerning the conflict in Checnya is completely inappropriate. Whether is it necessary to the people of Belarus? What is favourable for Belarus to have the kind relations with Russia or confrontation?
3. In a number of speeches of the delegates of the congress, including the message of Zenon Poznyak it was spoken that imperial Russia tries to capture Belarus. It is necessary to note that in general the uniting initiatives originate from the present president of Belarus A. G. Lukashenko and it is possible to accuse Russia that it wants to capture Belarus only for a very incompetent man or pretending that he is incompetent. Other business is that A. G. Lukashenko tries to sell the sovereignty of Belarus. The Russian experts estimate that "the friendship" with the Republic of Belarus comes to Russia in 1.5-2 milliards of US dollars. Such friendship can be eternal. Having put лon knees╗ an industry and the agriculture by the incompetent management and a mistake in the choice of a model of the economic development of Belarus A. G. Lukashenko feels the inevitability of a future outcome. He tries in any way to prolong the agony of the mode, gets into the debts. It is necessary to pay the debts and with what means? With the sovereignty? And what is Russia blamed for? Is Russia guilty that Belarus has no means nothing to pay for power grids? It is necessary first of all to understand the situation in Belarus, it is necessary to understand our president why he ravaged Belarus. And kind or even the special relations with Russia do not mean the loss of the sovereignty, and on the contrary will strengthen it. For example, the special relations of England and the USA do not mean that someone from them has lost the sovereignty. In incorporated Europe there are no practically borders, but are the European states not sovereign?
4. In the speeches of the majority of the delegates of the congress and especially in the speeches of the artists it was spoken that to revive the Belorussian nation it is necessary to revive and interdict the Belorussian language. Not having anything against the use of the Belorussian language I think that it is the right of the citizen of Belarus to choose the language to speak. It is wrong to take this right away. Any violence in this question will inevitably result in counteraction and conflicts. On a post - Soviet space because of such violence a lot of blood has already spilled. Some artists and especially the supporters of BNF try to prove that if the Belorussian лnot speak his native language╗ he is a damaged citizen and in every possible way they damn such compatriots calling them non-nationalised elements, marginals and internationalists. As well as many radical inhabitants of Belarus I have here a lot of the relatives from Belorus, Poland, the Ukraine and Russia. Our ancestors were born in Belarus. Someone thinks that for him it is convenient to speak Russian, for someone - in Belorussian, someone - in mixed. It was so and it will be so. This is our right and we want to do so. When some "Belorussians" declare: лwho does not know the Belorussian language Ц leave Belarus!╗ - it arouses the return reaction from a lot of people, it would be desirable to send them and as "far" as possible. Any violence causes only violence.
5. The speakers spoke about the love to the Motherland. It is necessary to love the Motherland and to take it as it is. From the speeches at the congress it is possible to make a conclusion that the speakers love the УvirtualФ people it means the people should be as they think.
In the world there are a lot of examples when actually the language does not determines the behaviour of the people. For example, in India the state language is English and what? WouldnТt the government of India carry out the policy in the interests of their people? Would the Indians be less nationalists because of this reason? People from Northern England speak English, but as the experts approve they are nationalists even are more than Irish! Practically in one language speak in Austria and Germany and what from this? The Americans (the USA) is a nation of the emigrants from all countries of the world but because of this they are great nationalists!
From my point of view, a nationalist, in good understanding of this word, can be considered that man who cares of that nation which was generated for today instead of the virtual nation which should be in the inflamed imagination of some citizens.
6. Almost all speakers expressed their concern in connection with the fall of a vital level of the people of Belarus and said that the present president A. G. Lukashenko is guilty in this. I completely agree with this idea, however I can not agree with the way to overcome poverty which the representatives of BNF and national intelligentsia offer. Most figuratively it is formulated in the newspaper "Solidarity", where the writer Vasili Yakovenko writes: лSo, friends the comrades, - there is no practically the alternative to the national idea, as only national states on their system, as any others, are capable to use, to spend and to increase the material and spiritual resources full, economical and effectively. Only they, these states, are capable to keep the civilisation from a moral and spiritual exhaustion, drug addicts, terrorism, detachment, chaos, that in the total combination can result in the complete degradation and destruction╗. If we think we will see that it is his offer for Belarus to leave from crisis. I do not doubt in the literary talent of Vasil Yakovenko, but with his statements I can not agree. LetТs remember the way which N. S. Khrutshev offered to solve a problem of the agriculture - "corn". As it is simple, you have found such "means" and solved all problems. Some figures offer to all Belorussians to remember what they were УlitvinasФ. As it would be good all Belorussians would wake up in the morning and remember that all of them are "litvinas" and everything appeared it is "the paradise" and only. But there is other circumstance. Whether you a litvin or not you want to eat! And if you are a litvin from what will everything come from? You see, will someone pay for us if we are litvinas? My neighbour earns not enough, it is difficult for her to feed children, and in some families of my house children do not eat enough food to be physically well developed, it is possible to tell that we speak about a physical survival. So if you come to my neighbour or in any other needy family where children are hungry, and tell them: лFrom this moment you are litvinas!╗. They, and it is the best variant, will show that you are mad or will send you somewhere.
What is offered as panacea from all troubles (the national idea) is obvious, but is it really panacea? The people of Belarus is really getting poorer. The most able and active part of the population leaves from the country in hope to survive, there, abroad. Having disappointed to earn something in this country, the majority of the businessmen turn off the activity. They simply work in such conditions that they do not want to open the business. What will be with the country, if its citizens will do nothing? The country will be lost! The nation will be lost! It will be soaked up by other, stronger nations. It is necessary to speak about the rescue of the people of Belarus, instead of their bellorusization. The situation is: a man sinks, struggles, tries to get out, and instead of the help he is offered to cut his hair.
7. The tragedy is that between the people of Belarus and their national intelligentsia there is a gulf. At the congress the words about the people of Vasil Yakovenko were remembered: лNow there is a problem with the people again. They became inaccessible to the educated cultural, harmoniously brought up, national intelligentsia╗. In his article he quotes the writer Sokrat Yanovch: лthe spiritually plundered nation of the Belorussians has run away in the anonymous crowd of idlers and having craned their necks roars on those who intend to wake their conscience and soul by shout. It is the madness!╗ Think over these words, it is a tragedy of the national intelligentsia. But are the people guilty in this? In his article Vasil Yakovenko quotes the words of Vasil Bykov: лUnprecedented in the civilised world paradox of our tragedy is that we, the Belorussian creative intelligentsia, create the culture for the people who were but today they are absent, they are stolen from us, only we do not know about it yetЕ╗. I looked in a hall and thought that the unfortunate people struggle for that people who are absent today, they hardly will win, they, most likely, are лthe eternal opposition╗. But even if we imagine that they will be the leaders, most likely, they will bring a new "trouble" national struggles, instead of prosperity to us. We should not forget that that many of the noisy persons (лthe real Belorussians╗) became the same two years ago. Many guests have no the Belorussian roots at all. But everyone want to be a rescuer of the Belorussian nation, forgetting that they were not asked about this.
By and large the Belorussians today are hostages of adventurous policy of two-three tens of men, former comsomol workers and old party leaders, as a rule, the deputies of the Supreme Council of the 13th- convocations. Earlier they led us order in the light communist tomorrow, now we do not know where. Neither in the capitalism, nor anywhere. They want to be ahead on a white horse.
The nation should be formed. It is formed and changes with the current of time. The revival of the Belorussian language is possible only by not violent way and only gradually.
It is necessary to remember one thing: a national language it is the means of dialogue, neither more, nor less.
Language should unite people, instead of to be the Уapple of discord".
Where is that point of a language readout? What is native language? In present Belarus in different time and in its different parts spoke the different STATE LANGUAGES. How many centuries shall we argue? For what? To find out who is better than the Belorussians.
LetТs imagine for one minute that an aggressive part of BNF and its supporters will come to authority. And we shall create a large reservations for Russian-Polish-Lithuanian RADICAL inhabitants of Belarus and we shall begin a war with Russia?
More than 70 % of the population (approximately 7 million of the citizens) of Belarus will be behind a wire and immediately will quarrel with лthe Russian imperialists╗? Do the present "leaders" who consider themselves to be the representatives of the opposition aspire to this?
Our ways are not the ways of A. Lukashenko. But it does not mean that we shall support the creation of a new mode or people who stand for violence and disrespect of the rights of the man.
We shall create opposition as today there is no opposition. And again we are ready to co-operate with all progressive population of the Republic of Belarus who do not depend on party and language accessory. The healthy forces are in all parties. A basis of association is the care of all citizens of the Republic of Belarus, the independence of Belarus, respect of the rights of each citizen.
Many people had the same thoughts only they were afraid to tell about them. Energy and certain aggression of the separate members of BNF force many political figures to "cower" before them, to be afraid that they "persecute". They said that it is their right to estimate the Belorussian people. They think that the people of Belarus should live according to rules established by them.
We, politicians of a new generation do not consider the people to be damaged or defective, we consider ourselves to be a part of these people, we perceive them as they are and we shall fight for their independence and prosperity and it does not depend what language they speak.
Valery Levonevsky. 1.08.00. Grodno
