The right to be right

The term ‘electoral sovereignty’ was first introduced in the National Security Concept project, which is currently in public comment. This is the inalienable and exclusive right of our state to independently and directly organise and hold elections, referendums in order to ensure the exercise of the sovereignty of the people and their freedom of choice under the supremacy of the Constitution and national legislation, and to prevent interference in the electoral process. In addition, the document says that ensuring electoral sovereignty is our strategic national interest. It is also indicated that the implementation of actions aimed at discrediting or disrupting electoral campaigns is one of the internal sources of threats to national security. 

What the consequences might be

Political scientists dealing with this issue note that interference in elections by other states almost inevitably has negative consequences, increasing the risks of a political crisis based on a loss of confidence in democratic political institutions. However, most likely, foreign interference in elections does not so much lead to any significant changes in the voting results as it contributes to the emergence and expansion of conflicts and splits within society. Our country has experienced in practice what some researchers study in theory. 

Therefore, it is not surprising that such a formulation appeared in the concept. Now we can confidently defend our ability to determine our own future through the calculation of the opinion of the majority, based on national interests in this matter. 

How it works

The end of the 20th century was marked by the elimination of the bipolar global system. The dominant economic, military-political and ideological position in the world began to be occupied by the United States of America. The strengthening of American positions in the world community was associated with the conduct of forceful actions of ‘humanitarian intervention’, the use of a strategy of unilateral action and infringement in a number of cases of the national interests of other states. 

After the collapse of the USSR, the CIS space acquired special significance for American policy. The states that formed in the post-Soviet space became strategic springboards for expanding the American presence, since the ruling political systems, having found themselves in a new state of independence, did not immediately become stable and independent. 

As Zbigniew Brzezinski noted, “It follows that America’s primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.”
In 1983, the A. Einstein Institute was established in the USA to study the technologies of non-violent political struggle, the protection of democracy and human rights. From the moment of its foundation, its employees began to regularly participate in various programmes of ‘preparation and support for revolutions’ in the interests of American democracy. 

According to working plan

As a result of reflections, they focused on ‘colour revolutions’. In 2003-2005, ‘velvet revolutions’ were successfully held in Georgia, Adjara and Ukraine. The states realised that the scheme was really working.

In 2005, a bill is introduced in the US Federal Congress to allocate additional funds under the Democracy Support Act. The law, aimed at countries where ‘democracy is under the yoke of dictatorship’, provided for the appointment of specially authorised advisers and assistants to the Presidential Administration staff, the State Department, the National Security Council, and all US embassies in these states. The goal is to promote democratic values. In 2006, $180 million were allocated for these funds, in 2007 — $230 million.
At the same time, an important role in the new conditions began to be assigned to election campaigns as an integral part of the democratic process. The most acute forms of foreign interference in the electoral process acquired from November 2004 to January 2005 during the Ukrainian ‘orange revolution’.
The elections in Ukraine have confirmed the high efficiency of using controlled election campaigns as mechanisms for seizing power and implementing a long-term and well-thought-out foreign policy.
Another common tool is the non-recognition and denial of the results of the elections. With the help of powerful information and propaganda pressure, including through diplomatic channels (statements by official representatives of the US State Department, PACE, speeches by foreign observers of the OSCE), an attempt is made to externally legitimise the seizure of political power.  

Under the guise of good intentions 

All these and other technologies have already been tested in Belarus more than once. Fortunately for our country, the manuals for interfering in the internal affairs of other states have not changed for years. During this time, a barrier against this type of intervention was built in the republic.

The legislation on the electoral process is regularly improved, as well as other legal acts aimed at ensuring the free exercise by citizens of their right to exercise political will.

Meanwhile, an interesting trend is observed in the world. What exactly do the Americans mean by promoting ‘democratic values’ by interfering, inter alia, in the electoral processes of other states, is understood by more and more countries. Freedom House recently stated with real American pain that 2021 was the 16th year in a row when more countries abandoned ‘American democracy’ than they gained.
The danger of the situation for the United States is that in this case the leverage for influence in the States becomes less. For those who directly deal with the wholesale planting of these values, it is obvious that under the guise of good intentions in the form of a bright and just future, the capitalist hegemon wants only one thing — further enrichment at the expense of the resources of other states. 

OPINION
Vladimir Andreichenko, Chairman of the House of Representatives,

“The modern world is shaken by the worst crisis of distrust and confrontation in history. The formation of new centres of power is accompanied by the growth of contradictions between the leading states of the planet. Under these conditions, the electoral process is used as a means of interfering in the internal affairs of countries, changing existing political systems and vectors of development. For this, developments in the field of theory and practice of ‘colour revolutions’ are used, and gaps in national legislation are actively exploited.
The reality is that there is a problem. There are many examples of destructive influence on election results. Such attempts were made in relation to our state. The expediency of introducing a new term ‘electoral sovereignty’ is currently being actively discussed by the expert community, scientists and practitioners. The deputies also participate in this process.
One thing is beyond doubt: the inalienable right of a sovereign state to conduct electoral campaigns independently, without interference and instructions from outside. As well as the right of society to make a conscious, democratic choice. This is the essence of democracy, which is the basis of the Belarusian statehood.” 

By Svetlana Isaenok