Lukashenko says he is ready to share power in Belarus as protests mount

[snoop1130]

Lukashenko says he is ready to share power in Belarus as protests mount

By Andrei Makhovsky

 

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko gestures as he delivers a speech during a rally of his supporters near the Government House in Independence Square in Minsk, Belarus August 16, 2020. REUTERS/Stringer

 

MINSK (Reuters) - Facing growing protests that have posed the biggest challenge to his 26 years in power, President Alexander Lukashenko said on Monday he was ready to share power in Belarus, although not under pressure from the streets.

 

His apparent concession came after exiled opposition politician Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya said she was willing to lead the country.

 

Amid increasing demands to quit after the biggest protest against him yet, Lukashenko faced heckling from workers at a factory he visited in Minsk on Monday morning with people chanting "Step Down" as he tried to answer their questions.

 

Opponents of Lukashenko say he rigged a presidential election on Aug. 9 to secure a sixth term in power. He denies losing, citing official results that gave him just over 80% of the vote.

 

He told workers on Monday there would be no new presidential election, something the opposition wants, until he was killed.

 

The official Belta news agency quoted him as saying he would be willing to share power however, and to change the constitution, but that he was not prepared to do so under pressure from protesters.

 

Work was already underway on possible changes to the constitution that could redistribute power, Belta reported him as saying.

 

Speaking in a video address from Lithuania, opposition politician Tsikhanouskaya urged security and law enforcement officers to switch sides from Lukashenko's government, saying their past behaviour would be forgiven if they did so now.

 

"I am ready to take responsibility and act as a national leader during this period," Tsikhanouskaya said, saying it was essential to make the most of the momentum generated by a week of protests.

 

She called for the creation of a legal mechanism to ensure that a new fair presidential election could be held.

 

Her video was released as Interfax reported that employees from the state broadcaster BT has gone on strike, after several of their presenters and staff publicly resigned last week in solidarity with the protesters.

 

The broadcaster was showing re-runs of old programmes on Monday morning before issuing a fresh news bulletin. Videos circulating on social media suggested BT had at one point aired footage of an empty studio with white sofas, and music playing.

 

Reuters could not independently confirm that and the broadcaster could not immediately be reached for comment.

 

Thousands of protesters marched in Minsk on Monday morning to the state-run Minsk Automobile Plant (MAZ) to where Lukashenko flew by helicopter to speak to striking workers.

 

Lukashenko played down the impact of the strikes, saying "those who want to work, let them work. They do not want to work, well, we will not force them," according to comments released by Belta.

 

The media outlet Tut.By reported that workers at Belaruskali, one of the world's largest potash producers, had also threatened to stop production. The state-owned firm, which is a key source of dollar revenue for Belarus, told Reuters on Monday its plant was still working.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-08-17

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

Facing growing protests that have posed the biggest challenge to his 26 years in power, President Alexander Lukashenko said on Monday he was ready to share power in Belarus,

Sounds like putin has told him Russia won’t keep him in power. 

[sanuk711]

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

He denies losing, citing official results that gave him just over 80% of the vote.

Mad isn't it, with all those people in the streets and protests  everywhere, you would think they would just say--yes we just got in by 52%---but no they have to do the 80s-- 90s stuff.

[sammieuk1]

Watch and learn generals your taxi will arrive next ???? 

[rcummings]

I'm just wondering if Putin is going to put up with a democratic revolution in Belarus. Lukashenko may have been a pain in Putin's a$$, but he didn't pose the kind of threat that a democratic Belarus would. What's to stop Putin from sending in the troops and taking the country over?

Edited August 17, 2020 by rcummings

[Amdesign]

1 hour ago, rcummings said:

I'm just wondering if Putin is going to put up with a democratic revolution in Belarus. Lukashenko may have been a pain in Putin's a$$, but he didn't pose the kind of threat that a democratic Belarus would. What's to stop Putin from sending in the troops and taking the country over?

Haha we already have 'democratic Ukraine', where Nazi groups are used to suppress the opposition, and the country became the slave of IMF. Yes, and the country is de-industrialized, with millions working now as cheap agricultural labor in EU. Indeed 'democracy' is very bright perspective for Belarus!

[mrfill]

And the right wing nutter baloneyvirus continues to spread around the world...

[Tug]

11 hours ago, rcummings said:

I'm just wondering if Putin is going to put up with a democratic revolution in Belarus. Lukashenko may have been a pain in Putin's a$$, but he didn't pose the kind of threat that a democratic Belarus would. What's to stop Putin from sending in the troops and taking the country over?

Why nato would stop him oops I forgot trumps try ing to casterate nato that beeing said imo that Lukashenko is getting scared hope so hope the Belarusian people give him and his family the old Benito Mussolini send off!

[Geoffggi]

In this day and age all dictators NEED to be replaced by honest democratically elected governments, fixing numbers will only lead to confrontation ..................!!!

[bendejo]

Share?  I hope they don't fall for that.

A little bit of the history of ancient Rome goes a long way on this subject.

 

 

[stevenl]

The west has so far stayed out of this, atm probably the best thing to do.

[Benmart]

He might do himself and Belarus a favor, resign and go to Russia so he doesn't end up as so many despots have.

[Tug]

53 minutes ago, Benmart said:

He might do himself and Belarus a favor, resign and go to Russia so he doesn't end up as so many despots have.

He’s probably worried he will be a liability to Putin and end up with a cap in the head compliments of comrade Putin 

[Proboscis]

14 hours ago, Amdesign said:

Haha we already have 'democratic Ukraine', where Nazi groups are used to suppress the opposition, and the country became the slave of IMF. Yes, and the country is de-industrialized, with millions working now as cheap agricultural labor in EU. Indeed 'democracy' is very bright perspective for Belarus!

I knew that it was only a matter of time before the Russian troll factory would make its presence known. Hi Ivan (or whatever your name is). Don't you think that your post is just a little obvious? Nazis? Really?

[rcummings]

5 minutes ago, Proboscis said:

I knew that it was only a matter of time before the Russian troll factory would make its presence known. Hi Ivan (or whatever your name is). Don't you think that your post is just a little obvious? Nazis? Really?

Maybe Ukraine has raised a zombie army?

[Burma Bill]

18 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

until he was killed.

Does he have a premonition??

[mfd101]

Putin will certainly be thinking hard about how to turn this in to the next block in his rebuilding of the Russian empire.

 

Remember, Putin is the man who has twice been mad enough to speak publicly of "My predecessor Peter the Great" ... which is the equivalent of Boris Johnson speaking of "My predecessor Thomas Cromwell" (or even 'Oliver Cromwell'), and not even Boris is mad enough to do that!

[Amdesign]

2 hours ago, Proboscis said:

I knew that it was only a matter of time before the Russian troll factory would make its presence known. Hi Ivan (or whatever your name is). Don't you think that your post is just a little obvious? Nazis? Really?

Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Corps

On the side bar: Ideology: national socialism.

 

[Iron Tongue]

6 hours ago, Tug said:

Why nato would stop him oops I forgot trumps try ing to casterate nato that beeing said imo that Lukashenko is getting scared hope so hope the Belarusian people give him and his family the old Benito Mussolini send off!

How exactly does Trump castrate NATO when none of the major partners contribute even half of their membership obligations for their own militaries?   This has been going on for decades.

 

NATO has castrated itself: Germany only has 94/244 operational Leopard tanks, (in contrast Chile , yes Chile! has 173 operational Leopard tanks!).  Fighters -4/128,  0/6 operational submarines, 0/15 operational frigates... 

 

The US, UK, E Europeans and Baltics are the only ones paying their share.  Everybody else just puts their hands out expecting the US will save them again in the next world war.

[stevenl]

20 minutes ago, Amdesign said:

Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Corps

On the side bar: Ideology: national socialism.

 

Which is not proof at all of your claims made in your previous post.

[Bundooman]

18 hours ago, rcummings said:

I'm just wondering if Putin is going to put up with a democratic revolution in Belarus. Lukashenko may have been a pain in Putin's a$$, but he didn't pose the kind of threat that a democratic Belarus would. What's to stop Putin from sending in the troops and taking the country over?

Nothing and no-one

[sanuk711]

7 hours ago, Tug said:

Why nato would stop him oops I forgot trumps try ing to casterate nato

NATO could be considered a joke--only once in its entire history has it invoked Article 5 (an attack against one member is an attack against all)

 

And that of course when America wasn't even attacked by another country but by terrorists  9/11.

Attacks on other NATO countries Even the UK have been unaided even though requested.

[puipuitom]

18 hours ago, rcummings said:

didn't pose the kind of threat that a democratic Belarus would. What's to stop Putin from sending in the troops and taking the country over?

Yes, a real democratic open and free election in Russia is Putin's biggest nightmare, but.. invading Belarus might be his second.

Remind: it is not a 45% who lost towards a 52% of the regime, but probably a 80+%, who wants a complete change. Putin, as former KGB agent stationed in the DDR for sure will have heard the stories of invading Warsaw pack troops in the Tsjechoslowak spring revolution in July 1968. How he would like to have hundreds of thousands Russian troops to come home with stories about election fraud, massive violent oppression of the peaceful demonstrating people and a president, who tells fairy tales ?

 

Putin needs economic prosperity, and for that he needs oil & gas export especially to Europe. Will the Europeans have the guts to protest and stop their purchasing, making with that Trump very happy, as now the USA now has to pay for the defence of Europe, while European €uro’s help to rebuild the Russian armed forces, and make the suppression in Syria possible .

[stevenl]

9 minutes ago, sanuk711 said:

NATO could be considered a joke--only once in its entire history has it invoked Article 5 (an attack against one member is an attack against all)

 

And that of course when America wasn't even attacked by another country but by terrorists  9/11.

Attacks on other NATO countries Even the UK have been unaided even though requested.

When has the UK been attacked and subsequently asked for NATO to step in?

[puipuitom]

4 hours ago, Tug said:

He’s probably worried he will be a liability to Putin and end up with a cap in the head compliments of comrade Putin 

In politics everything is possibnle. Maybe he gets a few million retirement money and a exile place around Munich - Bavaria - Germany or so as a part of the overall solution..

[sanuk711]

35 minutes ago, stevenl said:

When has the UK been attacked and subsequently asked for NATO to step in?

Let me just give you Just 2 examples Steve......In April 1982 part of what was considered UK (and still is) The Falklands,  was attacked and occupied by  Argentina. The UK requested the help of NATO in removing the occupied forces. It was refused with the excuse that the Falklands was to far to the south to be under NATOs watch. = NATO = North Atlantic Treaty agreement. (Yes the Falklands are in the Atlantic and most Brits thought rightly that it was just a complete cop out by NATO)

 

In 1956 The Suaz Canal owned and operated by the 2 countries that brought the land & made it France/UK was attacked and seized by the Egyptian Government with no compensation. 3 countries join to attack and take back--UK/France/Israel 

 

Wikipedia ----On 5 November, Britain and France landed paratroopers along the Suez Canal. While the Egyptian forces were defeated, they had blocked the canal to all shipping. It later became clear that Israel, France and Britain had conspired to plan out the invasion. The three allies had attained a number of their military objectives, but the canal was useless. Heavy political pressure from the United States and the USSR led to a withdrawal. U.S. president Dwight D. Eisenhower had strongly warned Britain not to invade; he threatened serious damage to the British financial system by selling the US government's pound sterling bonds. Historians conclude the crisis "signified the end of Great Britain's role as one of the world's major powers"

 

This action also speeded up the resolve of the French to leave NATO...who had their head quarters in Paris.

 

In the UK the question was being asked---what is the difference between the Panama Canal and the Suaz canal.

Answer--The Americans have an interest in the Panama Canal

 

 

Edited August 18, 2020 by sanuk711

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, sanuk711 said:

Let me just give you Just 2 examples Steve......In April 1982 part of what was considered UK (and still is) The Falklands,  was attacked and occupied by  Argentina. The UK requested the help of NATO in removing the occupied forces. It was refused with the excuse that the Falklands was to far to the south to be under NATOs watch. = NATO = North Atlantic Treaty agreement. (Yes the Falklands are in the Atlantic and most Brits thought rightly that it was just a complete cop out by NATO)

 

In 1956 The Suaz Canal owned and operated by the 2 countries that brought the land & made it France/UK was attacked and seized by the Egyptian Government with no compensation. 3 countries join to attack and take back--UK/France/Israel 

 

Wikipedia ----On 5 November, Britain and France landed paratroopers along the Suez Canal. While the Egyptian forces were defeated, they had blocked the canal to all shipping. It later became clear that Israel, France and Britain had conspired to plan out the invasion. The three allies had attained a number of their military objectives, but the canal was useless. Heavy political pressure from the United States and the USSR led to a withdrawal. U.S. president Dwight D. Eisenhower had strongly warned Britain not to invade; he threatened serious damage to the British financial system by selling the US government's pound sterling bonds. Historians conclude the crisis "signified the end of Great Britain's role as one of the world's major powers"

 

This action also speeded up the resolve of the French to leave NATO...who had their head quarters in Paris.

 

In the UK the question was being asked---what is the difference between the Panama Canal and the Suaz canal.

Answer--The Americans have an interest in the Panama Canal

 

 

No. UK never requested NATO help with Falklands. But yes, would have been refused, for several reasons.

[sanuk711]

26 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No. UK never requested NATO help with Falklands. But yes, would have been refused, for several reasons.

Why didn't NATO help the UK during the Falkland Islands conflict?

 

Because the Falklands lay outside of Europe, the NATO treaty did not apply to it and no nation in NATO was under any obligation to help out. And, as  noted, the Falklands were considered a colonial possession and no government in Europe wanted to side with a colonial power. The United States, then under Ronald Reagan, was in enough trouble in Latin America already and did not wish to further erode its relations by siding openly with Britain over islands with a population of two thousand humans and a couple of hundred thousand sheep.

 

 

Was New York considered outside of Europe when it invoked article 5

Article 5 is the cornerstone of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and states that an attack on one member of NATO is an attack on all of its members. But despite its importance, NATO has only invoked Article 5 once in its history—in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. https://www.history.com/news/nato-article-5-meaning-history-world-war-2

 

 

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, sanuk711 said:

Why didn't NATO help the UK during the Falkland Islands conflict?

 

Because the Falklands lay outside of Europe, the NATO treaty did not apply to it and no nation in NATO was under any obligation to help out. And, as  noted, the Falklands were considered a colonial possession and no government in Europe wanted to side with a colonial power. The United States, then under Ronald Reagan, was in enough trouble in Latin America already and did not wish to further erode its relations by siding openly with Britain over islands with a population of two thousand humans and a couple of hundred thousand sheep.

 

 

Was New York considered outside of Europe when it invoked article 5

Article 5 is the cornerstone of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and states that an attack on one member of NATO is an attack on all of its members. But despite its importance, NATO has only invoked Article 5 once in its history—in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. https://www.history.com/news/nato-article-5-meaning-history-world-war-2

 

 

Looking forward to any link stating the UK applied to NATO for article 5 to be invoked regarding Falklands. That was the claim you made that I subsequently challenged.

Edited August 18, 2020 by stevenl

[Amdesign]

5 hours ago, stevenl said:

Which is not proof at all of your claims made in your previous post.

Yes, not a proof for You, because You just another victim of CNN  ???? But for those who have brain and can use search - it is a valid proof.