Why Belarusians ignored recent election to Coordinating Council

The elections to the Coordinating Council, a significant event in Belarusian politics, saw a participation of just over 6.7 thousand people. Some candidates, in an attempt to explain the low turnout, have voiced their dissatisfaction with the media, citing a lack of attention given to the event.

The candidates, who have made significant sacrifices for the betterment of Belarusian politics, understandably feel offended. They have been instrumental in providing the Belarusians with a glimpse of what public politics can achieve. However, shifting the blame solely on the media is not a constructive stance, particularly for public politicians.

Euroradio discussed the results of the CC elections with media experts Iryna Sidorskaya and Pauliuk Bykouski and political analyst Artsiom Shraibman. Could the participants in the elections have chosen a different strategy so that last night did not end in frustration? And what do the final results tell us about the democratic movement?

Iryna Sidorskaya: People don't understand not only what the CC is but also what the parliament is and why it is necessary

I see several reasons for the low turnout, and the first one is the risk. Not only those who live in Belarus but also those who have moved abroad are worried about their safety: their own safety, the safety of their relatives, and their property. And that is why they refuse to participate. People living in Belarus are even more worried.

The second reason is that many people do not understand not only what the Coordinating Council is but also what a parliament is in general. The problem is not with the Council but with the fact that the Belarusian parliament has not been fulfilling its functions for many years. That is, people don't really understand what the separation of powers is in general."

They say there is Tsikhanouskaya and the United Transitional Cabinet—and why do we need something else? I think the lack of interest in these elections comes from a lack of understanding of democracy and what the parliament can do in general.

It seems that this knowledge is fundamental, but in our country, this "fundamental" has not worked for many years. In Belarus, the parliament exists to approve Lukashenka's laws. Perhaps people think that the CC is necessary to support Tsikhanouskaya's decisions. However, the platform where the culture of discussion is formed does not appear by itself. People have to practice to learn it.

The candidates themselves could have been more proactive in creating newsworthy events in the lead-up to the election. The media, a powerful tool in shaping public perception, could have been utilized more effectively. The same principles that apply to commercial marketing and advertising are equally applicable to political marketing.

But interest doesn't always mean willingness to do something. And in this campaign, people had many reasons not to vote. First, security. It's well known that Mr Liber and his team did the best they could, but the cloud of personal data leaks haunts the democratic forces. I know people who planned to vote, and when they found out they had to dump their passports somewhere, they decided not to.

Secondly, the democratic forces are not only CCs. People are interested in what the cyber partisans, Tsikhanouskaya, are doing - and they were not represented here.

The CC itself is not perceived as a significant body. If it were, for example, Tsikhanouskaya's re-election, I think there would be more interest. Moreover, the opposition leaders do not always understand that the Belarusian diaspora is rather depoliticized compared to 2021.

People don't understand the connection between the elections to this body and the real branches of power because the CC will have no power. It is not clear what this election will influence or what this body will influence. The campaigners had to spend most of their time explaining why all this was necessary. That's saying a lot.

Is it the media's fault? No, I think the media has given this campaign more coverage than it deserves.

If we talk about what this campaign has shown Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya and the democratic forces, it is that it is difficult to mobilize a significant part of the diaspora, and there are not many tools. I think this is also a lesson.

Pauliuk Bykouski: The media have given a shoulder to this campaign - but they should not lead it alone

Not enough people voted? What do you mean by "few" and "many"? And why should more Belarusians have voted?

Yes, in Belarus, more people usually vote in one district, but now the situation is different. For many Belarusians, the CC looks like a rather abstract body, and that's why only very motivated people pay attention to it. Besides, some people decided to support it, and others—to criticize it. Success requires consensus.

Now we can say that the number of people who voted is the actual number of people who are interested in what the democratic forces are doing and are willing to sacrifice their time to contribute to it.

Another problem is that the Coordinating Council itself has invested little in information and told us little about why it is needed in the first place. Yes, it would be good for the media to lend a shoulder to this campaign - but they shouldn't do it all on their own. Those media that felt it was a pro bono job for the sake of public interest have covered the campaign extensively. There were debates on you [Euroradio], on Belsat and on Radio Racyja.