2000s for Democracy in Belarus: a Decade of Disappointment

January 1, 2010 will not be just the beginning of a new year but the beginning of a new calendar decade. It is a formal and conventional event, but that’s the way our perception is constructed – it is easier for us to view history in decades. Swinging Sixties, Greedy Eighties, Noxious Nineties. The 2000s (or “noughties”) will be a separate segment in systematized history of mankind.

For Belarus, it was a decade of dictatorship. The first full calendar decade under the unlimited authoritarian power of Aliaksandr Lukašenka.

We have entered 2000 under the red-green flag of the Lukašenka regime and leave 2009 with it still over our heads. In the 1990s the key year for Belarus was 1996, when, after the infamous referendum, Belarus turned into a country where the whole power is concentrated in the hands of one man. 2006, with its tragic and disgraceful defeat of the opposition at the presidential elections, has become a landmark year in the 2000s. The lesson we should learn from these years is that 2016 is either unlikely to become the year of Belarus’ liberation from dictatorship.

In 2000, that seems so recent, one might have thought that Lukašenka is there for not a long time. A year, or two, or three, and Belarus will at last be free. Ukraine’s Orange Revolution in 2004 has spread much hope that was not destined to turn into reality. The noughties have been a decade of disappointment for Belarus, a decade which has completely turned Belarus into a very special country on the European continent.

Thirteen years have passed since the coup d’état of 1996. During this time a whole new generation of Belarusians has grown up – another generation of people with Soviet mentality, even though it’s been almost twenty years since the Soviet Union itself doesn’t exist any more. We may remind ourselves of 1957, thirteen years after the Nazi occupation of Belarus has been replaced back by Soviet occupation. By that time the anti-Soviet partisan movement in Belarus and neighbouring Soviet republics has almost completely vanished. Perhaps, this was not least because the society had realized that the Soviets came to stay. The same can be said about today’s Belarus, with its tired, demoralized and split opposition; with the fact that Belarusians have mainly concentrated on consumption and primitive physical survival so that even the economic crisis does not initiate political protest.

In 1999 there could still be doubts, but the noughties have proven one thing to us. Belarus might have gained juridical independence simply following the trend set by Baltic countries and Ukraine, who had really struggled for it. However, we couldn’t have got democracy the same way. A whole range of specifically Belarusian problems came into play: weak national self-identification of the people, lack of political culture and absence of national elite, the unfinished process of formation of the Belarusian nation as such. All the dark legacy of the Soviet age, which might not be so noticeable to an outside observer, has realized its potential in the 1990s and became institutionalized in the 2000s.

Belarus enters 2010 as a very specific European country. A political system that rather resembles the relationship of a feudal and his serfs. An archaic economy, where the government has woken up with reforms twenty years after liberation of the socialist camp and where it is not clear, if there is still something to be reformed. A nation that missed the train of 20th century’s romantic nationalisms and represents a mechanistic community of pragmatic and indifferent people without native language and historical memory.

Any difference is a potential advantage. Belarus may be able to transform its difference into an advantage, to realize its potential as a land untouched by investors in the middle of Europe or as a cradle for a post-nationalistic pluralistic traditionalism. Otherwise this potential will be spent in vain with sad consequences for the country. There is no third option, and there’s not much time left till we find out the answer. It is, of course, necessary to hope for the better, but it may be far more useful to be prepared for the worst.

http://belarusdigest.com/2009/12/30/2000s-for-democracy-in-belarus-a-decade-of-disappointment
Read more...

To Study, Study and Again Study Capitalism*

My new article on market reforms and privatization in Belarus, for Naša Niva:



To Study, Study and Again Study Capitalism*



For several weeks, before and after the Belarusian Investment and Economic Forum, the media was being bombarded by news on developments around the privatization of Belarusian state property and plans for further liberal reforms in the economy of the country. Belarusian authorities finally outlined plans to make order in the Augean stables of the national tax system - the world's worst according to international rankings. Movement in the right direction is good, but its shortcomings must be corrected.

How to attract adventurers

The Belarusian economy is perceived as a high risk investment target. To improve the image of Belarus, more than just one year is needed. Old scandals (unsuccessful investors to Belarus in the 1990s, like "Baltika" or "Ford") are much better remembered than new success stories. No protection of investments, biased courts and the overall exotic totalitarian image of Belarus - the government has a huge scope of work to do. Positive changes must happen and be recognized by the international community.

Only adventurer-type investors would be ready to invest in Belarus now. For ignoring the risky image of Belarus they want high returns on their investments. Prospects of such returns are vague: Belarus doesn't have natural resources that attract investors to Russia or Kazakhstan It is hardly possible to transform Belarus from the "Assembly Shop of the USSR", as it was called in Soviet times due to Belarusian heavy industry supplying the rest of the USSR, to "a Small Assembly Shop Near the EU" because Belarus is not even a member of the WTO. Today, when Finnish wood processors sometimes find it easier to handle Russian wood in China, Belarus is not physically able to compete with Asian countries as an eventual location for foreign production facilities.

"To be proud of one's export potential is past century," a senior foreign delegates of the Belarusian Investment Forum said in a private conversation. Investors are more interested in domestic market and the effective domestic demand, on which Belarus is not very attractive, he added.

The government could sell state-owned companies, which it can't manage anyway, for a lower price, but today the Western investors have enough cheap objects at home. This makes them less interested in Belarusian enterprises. There are many assets for sale in Belarus, but many of them lack a realistic valuation, the forum participant complained.

Bluff as style

Arrogance and inflated self-importance are usual for the foreign relations of the Belarusian government under Lukashenka. Their speeches sound like foreign capital just can't wait to rush into the country. This is where the high prices for state companies, which still require a lot of work to be done prior to a sale, come from.

So, it was strange to hear Prime Minister Siarhiej Sidorski presenting the Belarusian centralized economy as a successful model compared to the crisis-causing free market capitalism. Just as free market has very little to do with the causes of the current economic crisis, even the Belarusian Investment and Economic Forum, where Mr. Sidorski has held this speech, seems specifically to have been organized because the old approaches to the Belarusian economy had stopped working. There is a need for Belarus to catch up two decades of market reforms. In 2010 Belarusian accounting standards will be brought closer to IFRS, the licensing system will be radically simplified et cetera. Just why couldn't it all have been done in the previous years?

Already too late, or not yet?

The Belarusian government only learns to act in the circumstances of a modern economy. There has been a comic phrase occasionally said by Chairman of the State Property Committee some time ago, according to which the government of Belarus had then finally realized, what the difference between transforming of a unitary enterprise to a joint-stock company and privatization was. However, some publications in the media or the sudden appearance of the still unitary Beltelecom on the privatization list for 2009 indicate that there is still large space for the elimination of illiteracy.

Belarusian officials have found out about such a thing as a listing on a stock exchange and carefully repeat words about preparations for IPOs of companies of the Belneftekhim holding. It brings optimism to hear such things from previously conservative officials. Professionalism of the key people in the government and their ability to learn - that is what gives hope to investors.

The reforms are advancing very rapidly and even demonstrate short-term benefits of an authoritarian regime, that is not burdened by a discussion of new legislation with the parliamentary opposition. The latter is what has been drowning reforms in neighboring Ukraine over the past years. The problem is that the effect of reforms and good international ratings can be expected only in not less than five years. Much earlier will we know whether the government of Belarus is not already too late with its today's reformist enthusiasm. Those who come too late will be punished by life, Mikhail Gorbachev used to say.


// Naša Niva, translated by myself and Google Translate

---

* "To study, study and study communism again" - a quote attributed to Vladimir Lenin
Read more...

Belarus: a Reason for Cautious Optimism

My newest article in the Belarusian newspaper Nasha Niva, here translated into English (blame Google Translator for the errors! )) ):

Belarus: a Reason for Cautious Optimism



"For me there is no such country as Belarus," a British business coach told me three years ago. The man was proud to have taught in almost all European countries. More precisely, all except Belarus.

An isolated island between the EU and the more-less globalized Russia, Belarus just did not exist then for the international business.

Many things have changed since then. Belarusian authorities have started trying to diversify their foreign relations, to attract investments and privatize large enterprises. However, Belarus still remains a terra incognita for the international investment community.

The responsibility can be put on the global financial crisis, in the midst of which Belarus has entered the information field as an eventual investment target. The crisis dramatically reduced the number of investors and increased the number of objects for investment in countries with much lower risk than in Belarus.

One should still praise the Belarusian Government for its efforts: the economic liberalization goes on, even though sometimes strangely or slowly. There were statements as to Belarusian companies entering Western capital markets. There are negotiations on a tender among foreign investment banks to advise the Government of Belarus on privatization issues. Private investors are establishing joint ventures in the country. And at the beginning of the month the news came out that Beltelecom, the telecommunications monopoly, may be either offered for sale or transformed to joint stock company before the end of the year.


The backlog is growing every day

Despite the increase in the overall rating according to WB's Doing Business report, Belarus, according to the same study, has the world's worst (!) taxation system and is located in the bottom of the rating as to level of investment protection. As long as there is no progress there and as long as the government is using Soviet-times economic policies, especially related to price regulation, no investors will come to the country.

The Belarusian government seems to have set a formal goal of correcting two or three paragraphs of Doing Business each year: last year there was a sharp spurt in property registration and issuance of building permits, this year we saw a progress as to company registration. Hopefully by fall of 2010 we may expect progressive changes in the taxation system, international trade or protection of investors - the key framework characteristics to be improved by Belarus.

Besides that, it seems that the progress of market reforms is more concerned with implementation of formal criteria for Doing Business and is motivated by pressure from the International Monetary Fund rather than by the awareness of the necessity of these reforms for Belarus.

This applies to privatization, where the government is slow to pass key legislative acts. Negotiations on the partial privatization of MAZ, BelAZ, and a number of unprofitable enterprises are being held behind the scenes and opaque. Can the investor have certainty in this situation? There are two and a half months left till year end, and the public had not yet received a report about how the planned privatization of state companies is going on for 2009 - as it has newer seen a report on realization of the privatization programme for the year 2008.

Soviet culture of management, even in large enterprises, the inability to operate in a free market, and even poor English language skills - in these important aspects of Belarus remains if not the most backward country in Europe. The backlog is growing every day that the company is not sold to private investors who could modernize the business. With the growth of the backlog, the eventual privatization price goes down and so does the potential revenue for the deficit Belarusian state budget.


Belshyna on the Warsaw Stock Exchange

For the success of economic reforms Belarus needs an Agency for privatization and attracting of foreign investment, which would advise foreigners and inform the public about the progress in privatization of state industry.

It is not clear what the result was given an undisclosed amount spent on the British PR agency of Lord Timothy Bell. Interviews organized by the agency in the western media were rather some curious and exotic dictator interviews, but it is difficult to speak of their positive effect on investment attractiveness of Belarus. Perhaps the PR effect was the fact of signing a contract with Bell itself. Another effect was the sense that before engaging in PR you need to create something that would actually require this PR.

It would be interesting if the government of Belarus would organize at least one IPO of a big company, for example, the tire producer Belshyna on a stock exchange close to Belarus, for instance, the Warsaw Stock Exchange. The country should have enough resources to afford listing at least one state enterprise. In parallel, in such a case study would be to debug the legislation, which would allow to maximize the potential price of assets sold on the market in the future.

Belarus should use the experience of its neighbours and attract successful Eastern European reformers like Mart Laar, Vaclav Klaus or Kakha Bendukidze as advisers. Moreover it should make use of internationally recognized Belarusian economists like Jaraslau Ramanchuk or Aleh Tsyvinski. Unfortunately, it does not seem realistic that the government would do so.


Step into irreversibility

One shouldn't expect the return of politically motivated sponsorship of Belarus from Russia, therefore there is no alternative for Belarus but to attract foreign investment and to mobilize the entrepreneurial potential of the nation. The latter is possible only through economic freedom.

It is generally believed that economic freedom leads to political freedom. In fact, the demand for political freedom can appear only once there will be a group of wealthy entrepreneurs independent of the state. We have the example of modern Russia, where the regarding human rights, according to international organizations, is not much better than in Belarus, but where business conditions are much more favourable.

The Belarusian authorities have the opportunity to revise the social contract in the direction of stimulation of private entrepreneurship, refocusing on active and young people, as it is now in Russia. It is an uneasy but potentially very promising goal for the government of Belarus.

If the transformation of the economy will be conducted properly and if the country will avoid major economic shocks, the current regime will have time to adjust to new conditions and, possibly, to prepare for a step-by-step introduction of a pluralist democracy that will be demanded by its Western partners. With the progress of the reforms the Belarusian bureaucracy will adapt to them and start being interested in them.

Reforms in Belarus did not obtain the proper tempo, shape and transparency, but there is still reason for optimism: they have probably become irreversible. The effects of political and economic decisions are not felt immediately. But there is hope that after the past lost fifteen years, the country has entered a path towards constructive development.

// http://nn.by/index.php?c=ar&i=30692
Read more...

The Soviet Story (Padomju stāsts, 2008)

The Soviet Story (Padomju stāsts), a 2008 Latvian documentary about Communist crimes (in English and Russian with Latvian subtitles). Includes interviews with Russian and European historians, a Finnish EU Parliament Member, a former member of KPSU Central Committee, with the Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky. Very worth seeing.


Part 1: http://irc.lv/video?id=YrHosaqsKcUW

Part 2: http://irc.lv/video?id=q8Fyk1CH4vUw


The very good thing about this movie is that it underlines that roots of Soviet terror lay in Marxist ideology itself. Stalinist USSR was not a misinterpretation of Marx' Socialism - it WAS Socialism just as Socialism was supposed be.

Hitler was a National Socialist and the Soviets claimed to be "International" Socialists. There's no difference as all of them were fans of social engineering and constructed totalitarian states that should define and control all aspects of a person's life. Hitler killed people according to their ethnicity, Stalin killed people according to their social status. I'd call that difference a matter of taste.

There must be a Nuremberg Trial for Communist crimes. Not really to forbid something - but for people to get the right attitude to the USSR and to left-wing ideology. Although it's "uncool" today to be a fan of Hitler and "not very cool" to be a fan of Stalin, it is still completely acceptable to be Marxist or Maoist and even "cool" to be a fan of Che Guevara. While there's not really a big difference between them all.
Read more...

Belarus not in CEE?

An interesting research on Roland Berger's website: CEE Headquarters: Effectively managing a fragmented growth region

Belarus is for global business as usual a Terra Incognita in the centre of Europe: no information on Belarus on p. 6 (although the GDP growth rates and population could have been found easily), and an expressive "?" on Belarus' map for wage cost relation on p. 7 (my estimate would be around 27). The country simply does not exist for westerners. Not because they want to, but because it really does not exist as a place to consider as a potential investment goal. A pity now, but - may be a great opportunity for the future, when it will finally be over with the regime of Aliaksandr Lukashenka.
Read more...

"European Choice" As A Ticket to "Titanic"

A translation of my yesterday's post to http://www.pozirk.org/ by the guys from http://blogs.tol.org/belarus

The "European Choice" as a Ticket to the "Titanic"

It is more than popular in the democratic community now to talk about European standards and that Belarus should follow the European path, introduce “European reforms” to comply with “European Quality Standards”. No one explains what it is, being European, making a “European Choice”, but everyone for sure knows that it is something attractive, sweet, warm, and tasty. Chruschov promised every family to have a flat and live in communizm by 1980. Like this, lots of naive people in Belarus suppose that Belarus should join the EU by ANY means, and the effect of this accession will be close to that of getting into comunizm waters.

Therefore when I read those calls to come to European March, I simply don’t know what to feel or think. Please don’t misinterpret me: we should go there - but for a different reason.

Calls for eurointegration resemble calls to provide everyone with free meet for the rest of their lives: here is an example of a typical logic employed today:

"Belarusian pension is something you can only cry on, not live on. Like an elderly lady who had worked all her life like an accountant asks why a German accountant who had worked at the same job, with the same responsibilities (but only in Germany) gets 600 EUR pension and can travel on that. Whereas she gets only 150 USD. They both worked the same time, with the same effort, but the Belarusian lady can survive only with her sons help, whereas the German Frau can travel around Europe. This cry shows all! The lady wants to live in Europe, get European pension for a European work . And the only thing that barrs her from that is that she lives outside Europe. Just a bit outside… "

So, what are we being offered now? That Europe is a magic key to all our problems. Should it come - and our life will turn into heavenly succession of problemless days. But it is never immediate. The German and the Belarusian accountants did DIFFERENT things as they worked for different economies. The Soviet woman worked for an ineffective socialist economy which was destined to die, sooner or later. This is the real tragedy, and not only of that lady in question, but of millions of people who wasted their effort to do useless work for a useless system. C’est la vie.

Democratization and europezation won’t GIVE people their long-wished well-being: they will ALLOW them to EARN it through hard work. It is difficult to fight agains Lukashist populizm without being a populist yourself, but democratic populism still remains demagogy, from whatever side it comes. Or may be Belarusian nation can not accept more complicated arguments?

No one asks a question how long European heaven will hold and what will it bring us. We just hear a “hardtalk” which all the time finishes in a conclusion that “we should move to Europe coz we are Europeans”, and that “when we join the EU, we will start earning like the Europeans”.

However, eventual accession of Belarus to the European Union brings lots of negative things as well. Bureaucratic apparatus created by Brussels weighs so much that the “old Europe” economy almost does not grow. This is the reality where shops are forbidden to work after 7 and where tax pressure exceeds 50% on average. These tax money are further redirected into such welfares when unemployed people get subsidies reaching an average salary in their country. They are also transferred into salaries of bureaucrats in Brussels. Salaries which are more than high.

This is a real social union. And social union (or state) is inflation plus unemployment, and that exactly what we see in the EU case. If it had been limited by just some states - one could carry that, but such standards are being imposed on all new members. Say, Estonia had to stop its several liberal trade programs and even increased import tax for some non-EU goods just because membership conditions required that.

European socioeconomic model does not simply deeffectize economy, but turns some categories of people into parasites (in a milder form than in social economies, but they still think that the state should take care of them in difficult situations).

And this is the main thing that immigrants living on subsidies in their ghettos learn about European life. And what is the awfulest thing here - that those people living on subsidies are RATIONAL in their behaviour: “Why should I care when the state will take care about me. Why should I work when the industrious pay half of their income to support such lazybones like me?”

// Source

Actually, there was also a second part of the post published today, hopefully they will translate it as well

UPD here it is:

Talented people were usually leaving Europe for America and Canada, and had been doing that till the very recent days. Entrepreneurs could realize their ambitions much easier in more liberal United States, Australia, or Canada, than in socialist Europe. Just recall Arnold Schwarzenegger who quitted his European Austria for the US dream.

Demographically Europe is dying, and after 50 years is going to turn into one big house for elderly people. That concerns not just the age, but also dinamism, innovativeness, proactiveness of position. Even now Western Europeans are the people who need nothing else from the world but to have their social guarantees and a croissant in the morning. They are sure the state will take care of them. And as a result, European culture is retreating under a passionate influence of active immigrants from Turkey, Africa or the Middle East.

Economically, countries of South-Eastern Asia together with the USA, Brasilia, India, and China are going to dominate in the world of the 21st century. Ok, adding up Russia whose oil influence will not decrease until Chinese economy is growing. The EU has no strategy for development, and has no clear view for the next 10 years. This might end in one of the 2 variants; either acceptance of liberal values and imminent economic and political increase, or a crisis with a post-acception of liberal values. Now Europe walks more the second way.


Once having joined the EU, there will be no way back. Accession to the Union means loss of state sovereignty. Once and forever. And this is not just about national honour, but about a simple ability to act as you want without a repressive influence of the social bureaucratic EU machine from outside. The machine which has no idea of what is going within. The Union is bound to centralize more as time passes, with local and national powers being left just with current-day questions to solve. As a small country, Belarus will have no weight inside the EU. And when joining, the EU will centralized more than ever.

Do we want Belarus to become part of such construction? After mere 15 years of independence to have come after 300 years of historical absence, do we really want to become pensioneers of this world?

There is a sence for Belarus to become a part of NATO. Accession to this organization will mean a guarantee for us that we are not going to assaulted again; this is a sign of democratic, choice in favour of freedom, democracy, and progress. A guarantee that not a single Eurasian empire will take our country out of that.

We need a non-visa and free-trade regime with the EU - exactly like with the other neighbors and in general with as many countries - as possible. But by no means we need to hang ourselves on the chain of eurobureaucrats, which depend on those social regime, and by no means we need to abandon our state sovereignty.

We should say NO to fetishization of the EU; we don’t have to behave like Georgia or Albania begging to accept us into the European family: we ARE Europeans. We should aim not at the EU accession, but at building a market competitive economy which would allow all people to earn decently and live with honour, which is based on democratic principles. Eurointegration might be a means on that way, but not an objective in itself.

There is only one valid argument in favour of European choice which can cross all arguments against. Pragmatic reality often dictates the choice which is far from the desired one. After years of anti-NATO ideology and in the wake of the fact of the NATO allergy people have now, the only option against new integration into an “Axis of Freedom” of some Eurasian dictators or into some new formation of the CIS which strengthened revanchist Russia will start assembling is a socialist, but at least democratic UE.

Read more...

It's time to win

My article on the Manifesto of new generation f Belarusian politicians

- kindly translated into English by the guys from TOL blog Belarus

and

quoted on Global Voices Online
Read more...

Solidarity with Belarus

The 16th of every month is a Day of Solidarity with the victims of political repressions in Belarus

One of the few things we can do to support the people struggling for democracy in Belarus.



The Belarusian community of Moscow usually puts flowers to the monument to Janka Kupała, one of the most important Belarusian poets of the 20th century who died under unclear circumstances in Moscow in 1941. There are versions that his fall from a stairs in the Moskva hotel was inspired by Soviet secret police - just as in 1999 the politicians Viktar Hančar, Jury Zacharanka, Anatol Krasoŭski disappeared [and were obviously killed] and Hienadź Karpienka died of a "heart attack" in the moment when they all were most dangerous to the dictator Lukashenka.

More photos on my Belarusian-Russian blog
Read more...

Eurovision'2007

Eurovision Song Contest

Every year everybody says that Eurovision is crap and they do not want to see it. But still, for at least several days it becomes the most discussed topic in Russian media and blogs.

The winning song from Serbia is though not bad, but nothing special at all at the same time. Just an other whiny ballad in Serbian - I even liked the Bosnian song that took 3rd place on ESC'2006 more.

Ukraine's trashy Verka Serdyuchka - that's who was supposed to win! :)

The man (hm!) is famous in post-Soviet countries for his unfunny humorist shows and sketches, and only a couple of years ago he started to sing songs that were of bad taste too but still something good for moving one's body after some vodka on a village disco.

An important topic discussed in Russia is now whether it says "Lasha Tumbai" or "Russia, goodbye!" in Serdyuchka's song. Some Russian bloggers already proposed to boycott him just as they hysterically called for a boycott on Estonian goods a week ago because of Estonian government replacing a Soviet monument in Tallinn. Ridiculous and lächerlich! As most neighbors with a complicated history of relations do, many Russians and Ukrainians don't like each other. As I have noticed, Russians express this in rudeness and aggression; and Ukrainians laugh Russians off and put them in situations where they look stupid. This is a typical case.

Russia's Serebro and Belarus' Dźmitry Kałdun aka Koldun were nothing special at all. Just an other two Eurovision songs: not bad, but not brilliant neither. Much more I liked the songs presented by Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Ireland (I can't believe they got the last place!).

As to me, the very best song of this year's contest was Sopho Khalvashi of Georgia with "Visionary Dream". The promo video is as marvelous as the song itself!



That girl just broke my heart! The song got few votes - but that's because it's just too good for Eurovision, if you ask me.
Read more...

Scylla defeating Charybdis: WW2 in Belarus

My article on TOL blog Belarus

Reflections on the official holiday of Victory Day, 9th of May, 2007 by Aleś Čajčyc for Pozirk.org.

Translated from Bełarusian by eolonir and ox populi.

The Ninth of May. The “red day” as it is also known, one marked red both in the calendars and in peoples' memories. The Victory day. The day which I can't help calling the day of Pobeda. (Pobeda means “victory” in Russian, whereas in Belarusian it is called “pieramoha”). I catch myself at trying to use this Russian word in my language. The Russian and Soviet clichés and stereotypes are rooted too deeply in my mind – it is difficult to separate the Soviet myth and Soviet name of the event from the actual event.

In the Soviet mythology the victory over Fascist Germany in the Great Patriotic War – Vialikaj Ajčynnaj Vajnie (in Belarusian) -- Velikoj Ociečestvennoj Vojnie (in Russian) was a part of a long and awesome epic story about the power of communism. Soviet propaganda aligned all anti-communist movements, among them the “White Army”, the Western Democracies, the Belarusian Liberation movements under one category -- the enemies of communism, the dark forces. Victory over the Nazis was presented as the first step to the world communism domination.

Such holidays are usually celebrated to honour a victory against an external enemy and to honour the national army which made that victory possible. For Russia, the predecessor and successor of the Soviet Union, this war had really been the national patriotic war, the war for the national liberation. One can understand that it might be possible for the question about crimes of Stalinist regime and terror inside the country to be moved down the agenda – considering the threat to the existence of Russia as a country. The Russians were fighting for the very right to exist. Incidentally, the tradition to commemorate victories long after they have taken place is typical of Moscow – the 1812 Victory or taking over Kazan' had been celebrated for decades.

Lukashenka's Belarus has added another, special meaning to the celebrations of the 9th of May. Having no ideological or metaphorical grounding on which to build up the state system, the regime keeps grappling at the remnants of the past, at these emotional Soviet symbols. Moreover, it enslaves the present within the remnants of totalitarian past. How “patriotic” had this war been for those who had been occupied themselves? How much of a holiday is this for Bełaruś?

Read more...

15 years no Sovok

Today it's the 15th anniversary of the dissolution of the USSR. Something worth a party! ;)
Read more...

Partyzanfilm: paradocumentary about Antisoviet resistance in Belarus

http://www.partyzanfilm.net/

Meanwhile, yesterday the web site of the amateur film studio Partyzanfilm was launched. It will really be the first documentary movie about the anticommunist resistance in Belarus after its reoccupation by the Soviets in 1944, including reconstruction of battle scenes from that time.

Here you can download a 7 minutes scene.

The most exciting about it is that the whole movie is made by amateurs, young Belarusian emigrees in Western Europe. Łukašenka's regime may erect dozens of Stalin monuments and produce dozens of propaganda movies about those "brave heroes" from the NKVD, but as long as usual people spend their time and money for making projects like Partyzanfilm - this Neosoviet propaganda will never succeed.
Read more...

86 years Słuck Defence Action

Yesterday was the 86th anniversary of the beginning of the Słuck Defence Action - an armed attempt to defend the independence of Belarus in 1920, after the country was simply divided up between Poland and the Bolsheviks on the Riga Conference, where a delegation from Belarus (unlike Ukraine that was divided there as well) was not even invited to.

Here photos from a celebration organised by the Concervative Christian Party in Słuck at the building where the Słuck Congress took place to announce mobilisation and resistance against approaching bolshevik hordes. So good that Lukashist administration allowed this to take place.




More on Radio Liberty

Congratulations from Ivonka Surviłła, current head of BNR government in exile:

We should also remember our young heroes who showed to the whole world this March their readyness to fight for freedom and independence of Belarus


Congratulation letter from Zianon Paźniak, the leader of the Belarusian Popular Front and the Concervative Christian Party, in exile since mid-1990ies:

Słuck Defence Action is a clear example for us: to fight for your country you should not care about how strong your enemy is.


Žyvie Biełaruś!
Read more...

Belarus is visited by one thousand times fewer tourists than Czech Republic

An interesting comparison of numbers of tourists visiting Belarus and other countries.

"Proud" 90,000 tourisit per annum to Belarus versus 90 millions to Czech Republic or 500 thousands to "poor" Georgia "suffering from the ugly-Orange-liberal-Saakashvili-regime"

But still - these low numbers for Belarus keep the hope and make one wait for them to grow high after the collapse of Łukašenka's dictatorship. Because even after all the Russian and Soviet vandalism over the country, their destruction of Belarus' architecture, there is so much to see in Belarus.

http://www.tolblogs.org/belarus/en/?p=282
Read more...

To Be a Belarusan in Bialystok

dziki dzik gave me a link to an article about the situation with the Belarusian minority in Biełastok (Polish: Białystok) in eastern Poland. It is as sad as everything related to Belarus is...


To Be a Belarusan in Bialystok

Wojtek Kosc

What does an average Pole think when asked about Belarus? A neighbouring country with a grotesque president; a backward economy and a huge Polish minority, not always treated well by the authorities. Oh, and there are some of them here in Poland. Belarusans (not Belarussians) form a 250- to 300-thousand-strong minority in Poland (estimates vary), not always well-treated by the authorities either.

To an outside observer everything might look fine. Belarusans have their organizations such as the "Center of Citizen Education: Poland - Belarus," and their events, such as an annual rock festival in Grodek. In other words, Belarusans can be Belarusans in Poland. Even at the "Small Europes" festival, organized by the Solidarity-owned Gazeta Wspolczesna daily, a band from Belarus performed freedom songs. The band, whose concerts are forbidden by the present-day Belarusan authorities, sang about its dreams of a democratic Belarus. But should the band's members perhaps take a closer look at Poland, the hospitable country that allowed them to play their songs of freedom?

They should. In recent years - since the electoral victory of the Catholic right-wing coalition, Jednosc (Unity), in 1994 to be precise - Belarusans in Poland have experienced the effects of quite overt anti-Belarusan policies. Apparently, in this case "unity" does not mean sticking together for the sake of Bialystok's future but rather unifying along religious and nationalist lines. This is an observation made, not by some disappointed Belarusan or a blindly anti-right-wing leftist voter, but one expressed on the pages of Kurier Poranny (Morning Courier), a Bialystok daily, not associated with any political force and valued for its impartiality.

It is also an observation made by Mieczyslaw Wnuk, an essayist from Jerzy Giedroyc's respected Paris-based journal Kultura (Culture). In an article entitled "Big City of Bialystok," (Kultura 8, 1998), Wnuk describes how the city's authorities carry out their policy of erasing Belarusans and their culture from Bialystok's image, creating a wholly artificial picture of the city - which has always been a city of many cultures. Wnuk writes:

"The victorious Catholic right-wing make it no secret that they want no Orthodox officials (and no ineffectual ones either) in the Bialystok region."

As a Catholic party, Unity sees no role for Orthodox followers. And since the words "Orthodox" and "Belarusan" are synonymous in the minds of Bialystok authorities, both groups are discriminated against equally.

However, those two words are not synonymous. Belarusan national awareness stems from Catholicism, and the Orthodox Church in Poland steers clear of both national and ethnic identification.

Some striking facts illustrate the growing discrimination against Belarusans. After the AWS (Solidarity Election Action) parliamentary victory in 1997, money for renovation of the Orthodox monastery in Suprasl (which had been kept in a special budget reserve) was taken away. Last year, the Belarusan Society was refused funding for all its projects. The Belarusan Social-Cultural Society has yet to receive any money this year, although the Ministry of Finance has apparently already transferred the funds to the Ministry of Culture. Moreover, it is already known that next year's allocation will be ten percent less. Bialystok's 250th anniversary was celebrated without any reference to Belarusans' and/or Orthodox followers' contribution to the city's development.

When Member of Parliament Jozef Mozolewski (AWS) said that the money originally allocated for the renovation of the Suprasl Monastery was a "thank you" from the former Communists for the Belarusans' vote, the true reasons underlying the policy of Bialystok's authorities became clear. It is true that before 1989, Belarusans were quite loyal to the Communists, who allowed them to advance financially and socially, often at the price of denying their national identity. But if this were to serve as a basis for discrimination, it would be a very short-sighted policy indeed.

Belarusans and followers of the Orthodox Church have always formed a vital part of eastern Poland's society. Not only after 1945 but long before that as well. Exacting political revenge on them for choosing a particular political affiliation may be appropriate for a totalitarian country, but not for the model Central European democracy that Poland wants to be.

The amount of money involved in subsidizing Belarusan/Orthodox projects is not that large, and, to cite Wnuk again, "it will save neither the region nor Poland, but may seriously harm Poland's image."

Wojtek Kosc, 17 September 1999


http://www.ce-review.org/99/13/kosc13.html
Read more...