Valery LEVANEUSKI - personal site  
August 1st, 2000. Posted in Author's articles

« Main page

Once again about results of national Belarusian congress for independence of Belarus

On August, 1st 2000 in the newspaper «Soviet Belarus» Katya Prjanik has placed article under the name: «On the nitty-gritty of politics not all kettles cook». She refers to my article, devoted to congress «For independence». From this article follows, that Valery Levaneuski, is the ardent supporter of the present president of Belarus Alexander Lukashenka. Кatia has chosen from my article only separate words and citations. I will try to clear up. The policy who spends A.G.Lukashenka, will lead to a full impoverishment of the people of Belarus and to loss of its independence, it is antinational on the essence. Considered and consider, that A.G.Lukashenka should retire, as not consulted with the duties and not executed any pre-election pledge.

Finding A.Lukashenka’s power is a matter of time. The main thing is not in it. How to pull out Belarus from the tightened economic crisis? I have attentively listened to performances of delegates of national belarussian congress «For independence» and have not found in them the answer to questions exciting all.

The present people considering with oppositionists, are not those as a matter of fact under the maintenance, incorrectly operate in attempts of counteraction to politician AG. Lukashenka.

Belarus should be the sovereign, independent state. A geographical position of Belarus (the centre of Europe), the big possibilities of reforming in rather small country, a mental potential, human and natural resources – a basis of the future reforms.

Independence of Belarus corresponds to interests of the majority of citizens of republic. Independence preservation means, that the people of Belarus will be the owner in the country and in the future itself will solve the destiny. Independence is a freedom in choosing of the whole people. In case of sovereignty loss, can happen, that all vital questions of Belarus will dare in capital of other state, and the people of Belarus cannot affect these decisions any more. However it, perhaps, is unique, in what I agree with organizers and the majority of delegates of congress «For independence», on many other questions my vision of problems of the people of Belarus opposite.

On what questions our points of view do not coincide:

1. Organizers of congress named it «national belarussian», whether but so it is? What for today are the Belarus people? As though representatives of the Belarus national front(BNF) there did not want, is real 85 – 90 % of the population of Belarus speak in the mixed Russian-Belarus language with an impurity of the Polish words. It is necessary to perceive the people such what it is today, instead of what it management of (BNF) wishes to see such. I can not agree with figures of BNF considering, that if our people do not speak on the Belarus speech it is any defective people. National belarussian, means, on it all people should be presented, but at congress all performances were in the Belarus language, from here it is possible to draw a conclusion, that delegates of congress represented a maximum of 5-10 % of the population, and the name «National belarussian» mismatches the validity. On structure of delegates of congress it is possible to name it: « Congress of politicians and intelligence supporting BNF ». The» mass meeting» role has been given representatives of other organizations only.

2. In the declaration it is declared: «We for kind equal in rights and mutually advantageous relations with all countries, especially with neighbors: Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia …». Under such words would subscribe with pure conscience, however in a preamble of this document the state (Russia) with which authors of the declaration wish to have «… kind equal in rights and mutually advantageous relations …» is called as «new aggressive empire». Moreover, among delegates the edition under the name «Ryn» where somebody mister Uladzimir Krukouski named Russia «the Shagreen skin» extended and on a card has separated from Russia Tataria, Bashkiria, Buryatiya, Yakutia and other national formations. About the relation to Russia this “writer” writes: «Always our east neighbor (Russia) was represented to me by the thick woman, loud, lazy and unscrupulous, the lover to drink vodka and to eat, sing and dance. » If such “figures” really count on kind relations with neighbors what for to soil in the next territory? What for to interfere with internal affairs of the next state? International problems are and will be in many states. In England is a problem of Northern Ireland, in Spain is a problem of a province of Basques, in Canada is a problem of a province Quebec, in Turkey is a Kurdish problem. In Russia it is a lot of such problems and if they dare by the Yugoslavian variant the flame from potentially possible conflict which has flashed in territory, stuffed with the nuclear weapon, will reach and Belarus. So gloating of the mister Krukouski concerning the conflict in the Chechen Republic are absolutely inappropriate. Whether it is necessary it is to the people of Belarus? What it is favorable to Belarus, to have kind relations with Russia or confrontation?

3. In a number of performances of delegates of congress, including, and in Zinon Paznyak’s message it was said that a pier imperial Russia tries to grasp Belarus. It is necessary to notice, that generally unifying initiatives proceed from the present president of Belarus A.G.Lukashenko and to accuse Russia that it wishes grasp Belarus can only very incompetent person, or pretending, that it incompetent. The another matter, that A.G.Lukashenko tries to trade in the sovereignty of Belarus. The Russian experts estimate, that “friendship” with Belarus manages Russia in 1 billion US dollars. Such friendship cannot proceed eternally. Having put «on knees» the industry and agriculture the incompetent management and by an error in a choice of model of economic development of Belarus, A.G.Lukashenka feels inevitability of the future outcome. He tries any way to prolong an agony of his mode, gets into debt. It is necessary to pay for debts, and by what? It is by the sovereignty? But what about Russia? Unless Russia is guilty that Belarus has nothing to pay for energy carriers? It is necessary to understand first of all in Belarus, it is necessary to understand with our president why it has finished Belarus to such “ruin”. And kind or even special relations with Russia do not mean sovereignty loss, and on the contrary will strengthen it. For example, special relations of England and the USA do not mean, that someone from them has lost the sovereignty. In incorporated Europe practically there are no borders, but unless the European states are not sovereign?

4. In performances of the majority of delegates of congress and especially of art workers it was said that for revival of the Belarus nation revival and introduction of the Belarus language is necessary. Not having anything against application of the Belarus language, I consider, that the citizen of Belarus has the right to solve in what language to speak. It is wrongful to select at it this right. Any violence in this question will inevitably lead to counteraction and conflicts. On a post the Soviet space because of such violence already has spilt a lot of blood. Some art workers and especially supporters of BNF try to prove, that if the Belarussian «not speak on a pile to a speech» it is any defective citizen and in every possible way damn such compatriots naming their denationalized elements, marginally and internationalists. As well as at many aboriginals of Belarus at me here weight of relatives, among which Belarussians, Poles, Ukrainians and Russian. Our ancestors were born in territory of Belarus. Someone considers that it is convenient to it to speak in Russian, someone – on Belarus, someone – on mixed. So was, is and will be. We so would like, this our right. When some “Belarussians” declare: «Who does not know the Belarus speech – get out from Belarus! » Is causes in many return reaction, simply it would be desirable to send them, and is very far”. Any violence generates only violence.

5. Acting spoke much about their love to the Native land. The native land needs to be loved such what it is. From performances at congress it is possible to draw a conclusion, that the acting love the people “virtual” that is what it should be on their representations.

In the world it is a lot of examples when actually language is not defining in behavior of the people. For example, in India a state language is English, and what? Unless the government of India does not pursue a policy in interests of the people? Unless Indians from it are less nationalists? North Irish speak in English but as experts confirm, they nationalists even it is more than Irish! Practically in one language speak in Austria and Germany and what from this? Americans (USA) are the nation of emigrants from all light, but from it they are nationalists!

From my point of view, the nationalist, in good understanding of this word, can be considered, that person who cares of that nation which was generated for today, instead of about the virtual nation which should be in the inflamed imagination of some our citizens.

6. Almost all acting expressed the concern in connection with falling of a standard of life of the people of Belarus and made responsible for it on present president A.G.Lukashenka. I am completely soldiery with this thought, however I can not agree with how representatives of BNF and national intelligence offer to overcome poverty. Most figuratively it is formulated in the newspaper “Solidarity” where writer Vasil Jakovenka writes: « So, friends- companions, -there are no alternatives to national idea, for only national on the state structure states as any others, are capable to use, spend and increase full, economically and effectively the material and spiritual resources. Only they, these states, are capable to keep a civilization from a moral and spiritual exhaustion, a narcotics, terrorism, detachment, chaos, that in aggregate can lead to full degradation and destruction ». In essence it’s this offer – as Belarus to leave from crisis. I do not doubt literary talent of Jakovenka, but with his statements I can not agree. Let’s recollect, how N.S.Hrushchev suggested solving an agriculture problem, -by a “corn” It is so simple, to find such “means” and has solved all problems. Some figures suggest all Belarussians to recollect, that they were once «litvins». As though it was good, all Byelorussians would wake up in the morning, have recollected, that all of them «litvins » and all has appeared, well “paradise” and only. But here is other circumstance. litvin you or not and to eat it would be desirable! And if you litvin whence all to undertake? someone will pay what we will be called litvins? My neighbor receives very little, it is possible tell hardly can to feed children, and in some families of my house children under eat, it is possible to tell, that it is a question of a physical survival. So if you will come to my neighbor or in any other needy family where children hungry, and will tell it: «From now you are litvins! ». They, at the best, at a temple will twist or will send somewhere.

The national idea is offered as panacea from all troubles- it is obviously, whether but so it is obvious, what it is really panacea? The people of Belarus is valid grow poor. The most able-bodied and active part of the population leaves the country in hope to survive, there, behind a cordon. Having been disappointed, that in this country it is possible to earn something, the majority of entrepreneurs do turn off the activity. They have simply laid down in such conditions, that they do not see sense to open the business. What will be with the country if its citizens do nothing? The country will be lost! The nation will be lost! It will be absorbed by other, stronger nations. It is necessary to speak about rescue of the people of Belarus. The situation is approximately that: the person sinks, flounders, tries to get out, and to it instead of the help offer to cut him a hear .

7. Tragedy is that between the people of Belarus and its national intelligence the precipice was formed. During congress Vasily Jakovenka’s words which spoke about the people were recollected: «Now with the people again “zakavyrka”. It became inaccessible to the national intelligence educated, cultural, harmoniously brought up». In article it gives of a word of writer Socrat Janovicha: «spiritually plundered nation of Belarussians has run away in anonymous crowd of gapers, yes having lifted up heads, laughs loudly over those who the shout intends to clear their conscience and soul. A sheer madness! » Ponder upon sense of these words; it is tragedy of national intelligence. But whether the people are guilty in it? In article Jakovenka gives of word of Vasil Bykau in this occasion: « Unprecedented paradox in the civilized world of our tragedy that we, the Belarus creative intelligence, create culture for the people which was but which already is not present, from us it have stolen, only we yet do not know about it … ». I looked in a hall and thought, unfortunate people, they struggle for which those people are not present, they hardly will win, they, most likely,« eternal opposition ». But even if to present, that they will come to the power, most likely, they will bring to us new “trouble” of national dismantling, instead of prosperity. That, more, that many shouters (« true Byelorussians »), became those a year-two ago. Many visitors at all have no Belarus roots. But all apply for a role of saviors of the Belarus nation, forgetting that about it people did not ask them.

By and large Belarussians today hostages of an adventurous policy of two-three tens persons, the former Komsomol workers and old party functionaries, basically. They are Deputies of the Supreme body 13 convocations. Earlier they conducted us in light communistic tomorrow, now do not know where. They conducted us to capitalism, or somewhere else. To them it is important only to be ahead on a white horse.

The nation should be formed. It is formed and changes eventually. Revival of the Belarus language is probably only in the nonviolent way and only gradually.

It is necessary to remember: the national language is dialogue means, neither it is more, nor it is less.

Language should unite people, instead of to be “apple of discord”.

Where that point of language readout? What is native language? In territory of present Belarus at various times and in its different parts spoke in different STATE LANGUAGES. How many centuries will argue still? For what? What to find out who “more abruptly” the Belarussin.

Let us for a minute we will present, that aggressive part of BNF and its supporters will come to the power. We will create the big reservation for the Russian-polish-Lithuanian speaking ABORIGINALS of Belarus and we will begin war with Russia?

More than 70 % of the population (about 7 million citizens) Belarus will appear behind a wire and will immediately quarrel with «the Russian imperialists»? The present “leaders” considering with opposition aspire To it?

We have no any common way with A.Lukashenka. But it does not mean, that we will support creation of a new mode or the people propagandizing violence and disrespect for human rights.

We will create opposition since today oppositions are not present. Here again we are ready to co-operate with all progressive population of Belarus, without dependence from a party and language accessory. Healthy forces are in all parties. A basis of association –is care of all citizens of Belarus, independence of Belarus, respect of the rights of each citizen.

A lot of us had same thoughts, only they are afraid of it to state. Aggressiveness and certain aggression of separate members of BNF force many politicians to “squat” before them, to be afraid that “will peck”. They have appropriated the right to estimate the Belarus people. They consider that the people of Belarus should live by rules established by them.

We are politicians of new generation, do not consider the people any defective or defective, we consider ourselves as a part of these people, we perceive its such what it is, and we will struggle for its independence and prosperity, without dependence, in what language he talks.

Valery Levaneuski

« | »

Note: Translated by means of machine translation. The original text in Russian is on a site or