Loneliness after Shakespeare

Can the dictator rely on his entourage?

Political scientist Valery Karbalevich commented Radio Svaboda on prospects of resignation of the Belarusian ruler:

- Nursultan Nazarbayev' sensational resignation took place against the backdrop of talks and arguments about Lukashenka's alleged planned resignation, which he hinted at during the "Big Talk" on March 1. Therefore, the Kazakhstani experience is becoming more interesting.

History knows various options of resignation of dictators or authoritarian leaders.

The first variant. The ruler resigns completely, retaining only guarantees of his own safety. This is how Augusto Pinochet, Boris Yeltsin and Fidel Castro left their posts.

The second variant. The ruler announces his resignation, and no major formal positions are occupied, but he acts as a "grey cardinal". That is, he retains real power. This status was held by Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore.

The third variant. The ruler resigns from his position, and gives it to another politician. However, he takes another position, granting it special powers. Slobodan Milosevic did this and changed his post as Yugoslavian head and became the head of Serbia. Serzh Sargsyan wanted to do the same to remain in power in Armenia and become the prime minister, but he was stopped by mass protests. Actually, Vladimir Putin did the same in 2008-2012, becoming the head of the government, but retained real power.

Nursultan Nazarbayev succeeded in this last variant. He heads the Security Council of Kazakhstan. He has previously amended the Constitution, according to which the chairman of the Council has even more powers than the incumbent president.

This is despite the fact that he had his people, relatives everywhere, but does not trust even them. He once explained his vision: "As soon as you start looking for a successor, everything is ruined. Nobody is here, just me. There is no one but me to hold on to". Who can such a person trust?

What's the point to bargain one trouble for another? All this has been done for a gradual, controlled transit of power. So that his children would not be sent to prison after his death, as it happened in neighboring Uzbekistan.

Speaking about prospects of Belarus, neither the first nor the second variant is suitable for Lukashenka. But I strongly doubt that he will accept the third variant. After all, it implies the need to share power with someone. It is unacceptable for him. After all, the authoritarian ruler, who has been in power for a long time, does not trust anyone, and suspects everyone of disloyalty.

In addition, as a result of negative staff selection, his entourage is getting less competent.

At a recent meeting of the Security Council, Lukashenka said "Everyone sitting at this table and in front of me are not politicians, but people who working in their field".

Whom can he put his power and safety to anyone's hands, when there are only performers at the table who carefully make notes about "money", "Mercedes" and "chicks"?

It's the tragedy of loneliness, which requires a Shakespeare feather to express.