Selectorate theory, also known as the “theory of everything,” answers one of the most basic but previously unsolvable questions of politicians: what does it take to stay in power? The incumbent regime in Belarus is clearly in need of a plan to ensure their success in government. Through the lens of selectorate theory, a specific course of action can be laid out in order to ensure their political power in the future. In order to come up with this plan, selectorate theory must be defined: first on its own and in terms of Belarus’ regime. Then, one can compare and contrast the regime type with another regime with similar values of selectorate and winning coalition to put it into context. Next, the strengths and weaknesses of the regime will be pointed out until finally, and a course of action will be presented. In will then be clear which changes the incumbent regime should make to ensure that they stay in power. The core belief of selectorate theory is that all actions taken by politicians ensure their power and place in government. These actions are influenced by three specific groups of people in society known as interchangeables, influentials, and essentials. Interchangeables include every person who has any amount of power in selecting the leader. In a democracy, for example, this would mean all the people who are eligible to vote. Influentials are the group that actually select the leader. Again, in a democracy, this would mean the representatives in the Electoral College who cast their votes for leader (although due do the fact that electors rarely vote against their state’s wishes, it is arguable that the interchangeables include everyone who turns out to vote). The essentials are those who are necessary to the leader to ensure that she remains in power. In a democracy these are the people who give a politician an edge by allowing her to take office, commonly all people associated with the winning political party. The size of these groups are what determines how a leader goes about staying in power. Learning how to work within the confines determined by the sizes of these groups is a key to political success. For example, if a ruler wants to stay in power and has a small amount of essentials (likely a dictatorship), she will most likely have to pay off these essentials with private goods or favors to ensure their loyalty. If a ruler wants to stay in power and has a large amount of essentials (for example, in a democracy), public goods, which can by accessed by all, are the most effective way to stay in power. These, along with a multitude of similar rules based on the notions of selectorate theory will ensure a ruler’s success in office. More specifically, there are certain rules laid out that help an incumbent stay in power. The key to this is to keep the essentials loyal and happy. The way to do this is to pay handsomely, and appoint family and friends to the position of
highest power. This ensures that in times of threat from resistance groups, the people closest to the leader will not abandon ship in hopes of making it into the next regime. Although Belarus presents itself as a democracy, it is clearly run as an authoritarian regime with Alexander Lukashenko as the leader. A country is typically considered a democracy if their elections are free and fair and there exists freedom of speech, assembly, and media. Regimes that are not democracies can fall into the category of dictatorships. In the 2010 election, Lukashenko won 79.67% of the vote, while the runner up, Andrej Sannikau won a mere 2.56% of the vote. This data, along with the fact that President Lukashanko isn't popular due to his negligence for human rights, points to the fact that these elections are rigged. According to Freedom House, the internet, press, and speech in Belarus are not free. In addition, the President’s net worth tells speaks to the nature of the government. Despite being named one of the 10 presidents with the lowest incomes, ($33,873 USD) the President’s net worth is an estimated $9 billion. This is possible through channeling government money into his private pocket. This data implies that Lukashenko would also see no problem using taxes to pay off his winning coalition. These findings conclude that Belarus is an authoritarian state. Nov, given that Belarus is an authoritarian state, it is possible to decide who composes the essentials, influentials, and interchangeables. In a dictatorship, essentials are the group of people that the leader surrounds himself or herself with that provide support, loyalty, and advice in exchange for a hefty check. In Belarus, this group is composed of a mere 5 people: Viktar Lukashenko, Mikhail Myasnikovich, Uladzimir Makey, Andrei Kabayakou and Viktar Sheiman. Viktar Lukashenko is President Lukashanko’s only son who is involved in politics. He is rumored to be the heir to the metaphorical throne that Lukashenko sits upon and is currently the national security aid of Belarus. It is thought by many political analysts that Viktar Lukashenko has influenced every political move completed by the president since he was appointed to his governmental position. Mikhail Myasnikovich is the current Prime Minister of Belarus and one of the 50 richest men in the country. It is safe to assume that that money was provided for him by Lukashenko in exchange for cooperation and loyalty. The former Head of Presidential Administration of Belarus Uladzimir Makey currently works as an advisor to the president and is highly loyal. Lukashenko’s most trusted advisor and right hand man is Andrei Kabayakou. Kabayakou is the head of the presidential administration (appointed in 2012). He is Russian, which makes him a perfect no. 2 to the president because by law cannot run for president. This has decreased the friction often felt between leaders and their closest
advisors. The last person in Lukashenko’s group of essentials is Viktar Sheiman. Despite being thrown out of government in 2008 (at the request of Viktar Lukashenko) following a bombing in Minsk, Sheiman was found to be too useful to lose by the President and was quickly appointed as President for Special Tasks. Essentialy, his job is to dirty his hands for the president, taking care of things “tasks too sensitive to be sorted out through normal government channels” (known for making people disappear). These 5 men are all loyal to the president because of family ties, payoffs, and the fact that they dirtied their hands for Lukashenko. Next are the group of influentials. This includes the 102 members “elected” (election most likely rigged) in the House of Representatives and all the members in the council of the Republic (appointed by Lukashenko),Lukashenko’s financial backers, and military. These people ensure that Lukanshenko stays in power and have a moderate amount of influence over his governmental actions. Finally, the interchangeables is the total population of Belarus that are able to revolt against the president (since they have no actual voting power). Although they don’t have the power to select the current leader, they do have the power to evict Lukashenko from office through revolution and put new leader in place. In that regard they do have power in selecting the leader. It is also important to note the size of the wining coalition (W) in comparison to the size of the selectorate (S). According to a data set presented by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, Alistair Smith, Randolph M. Siverson, and James D. Morrow, the size of the selectorate corresponds to the number 1 and the size of the winning coalition corresponds to the number .5. This indicates a relatively large selectorate compared to a smaller winning coalition. The small value for W also confirms the notion that Belarus is not close to being a free nation. It is critical to compare and contrast this information with that of another country to reveal both the mistakes and benefits of the polices put in place by the respective leaders. Algeria is a country that has the same W (.5) and S (1) values as Belarus. The two countries have a similar governmental set up, featuring a President, Prime Minister, and a bicameral parliament or national assembly. The voting statistics of Algeria also point to rigged elections, with the current President Abdelaziz Bouteflika winning the election with 85% of the vote while the next runner up, Ali Benflis, won 6.4% of the vote (Bouteflika is also not a popular ruler, implying the rigging). Another similarity between the two nations is the length of time the current presidents have been in office. Bouteflika became president in 1999 and Lukashenko came
to power in 1996. According to Selectorate theory, as the time a dictator is in power increases, the likelihood that they will be evicted from power decreases. This is good for both of the leaders of each regime as it further increases grip on power. Both regimes are seen as oppressive and limit personal freedoms such as free speech and media. Algeria has made some effort to grant personal freedoms to people, which has a positive response in the international community. Although this is good for the people, selectorate theory warns that a leader who wants to maintain his position must not be concerned with the needs of the people and should limit rights (in the case that the country is run as a dictatorship). Another item on Algeria’s agenda has been economic reform. This has been one of the main focuses of President Bouteflika since coming to office. Algeria’s polity score has also seen a jump (from -3 to 2) since Bouteflika has been in office. This is something that Belarus can learn from, as it’s polity score has remained at -7 since 1995 (when it feel from positive 7). Although this is may be seen as beneficial from an outsiders standpoint, an increase in polity score is actually negative for a dictator: it means that the ruler has less control over their people. Algeria recently had a year of protests (likely inspired by recent protests in the middle east and other repressed nations). The government responded relatively nicely, taking measures to lower food prices. It is evident that the government didn't take harsh enough measures and should have asserted its power by allowing military reaction to get violent to quell the resistance groups. This is imperative in maintaining control of a nation because it destroys hope of a regime change and people are less likely to rebel in the future. Comparing Algeria and Belarus helps point out some of the strengths and weaknesses of the latter nation. A country rich in natural resources is beneficial to a leader seeking to stay in power because it is money going directly into their pockets and helps pay off the coalition. This helps keep the winning coalition small and competitive. The crisis of 2011 was a point of weakness in the Belarus regime. According to selectorate theory, people don’t revolt when they are rich or extremely poor; they revolt when they are somewhere in the middle. This economic crisis raised the inflation rate to 108.7%, making even the richest people feel the depression. A high percentage of the Belarusian population became very poor, which is great news for a leader who knows that the people don't have the means or will to revolt.
