|
Welcome to one of my short papers. This is not intended to be a comprehensive source
and contains the authors interpretations and impressions. |
|
|
| In a world
where reform and economic progress marks the success of an ex-soviet
state, Belarus is in a backward slide. This country of impoverished
military professionals, farmers, and heavy industry has not taken
well to melding with the world around it. What prevents this
country from following through on post communist reforms? What
Ills obstruct it's newfound passion for being a part of a great
quasi-Soviet state? One most obvious answer to both questions
is an elected President that has dreams of dictatorship. In effect,
Belarus is in the convulsive throws of forward stepping and side
slipping her problems. Thankfully, her disruptive president might,
by miscalculation, cause the needed change that Belarus so desperately
needs, A foreign policy of collaboration that makes sense in
today's political climate. Historically, Belarus has had a colorful past and a rich history of being in alliance and conflict with her neighbors. Through history she has been part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, The Polish empire and the Russian empire. Her native population developed a culture and languageuniquely it's own. The physical geography is a marshy flat that rests at a physical crossroads. Her true hope for survival rested in whom she joined with in military defense and cultural exchange. Geographic position shapes political thought and motivation and Belarus is no exception. Her borders with the west still mimic her past cold war status of being the buffer between the west and Russia. Experience has proven that Belarus is a pawn in a bigger battle of regional control. During World War Two Nazi Germany plundered the country. One third of the population was either killed in combat or died in internment/death camps. After World War Two, Belarus became the cold war zone of separation between Russia and the West. Soviet troops from all over the USSR were encamped in the country in a permanent posture of defense. Even transportation reflects this defensive stance.Roadways within the region crisscross just behind the western border in such a way as to provide ready access for defensive maneuvers while limiting access into Poland.2 Even in this day of military downsizing Belarus continues to face the problems of maintaining the largest military force for a country of it's size. On the 27th of July 1990 the Supreme Soviet of Belarus made a declaration on State Sovereignty3 and withdrew from the Soviet Union on the 25th of August 1991.4 The downsizing of the military was taken on as a top priority as soon as some political stability was achieved . Belarus faced the reality that funding would no longer support the military machine it once had. Cost reductions were needed for a military budget that is the smallest of any former communist country except Albania.5 Downsizing the war machine was, and continues to be, no easy task for a country whose existence hinged on being an oversized military base for the ex-Soviet Union. "As the USSR's front line in the potential military confrontation between East and West during the Cold War, Belarus had the highest concentration of military personnel and equipment of any Soviet republic. Some 250,000 officers and armed service members . . . one soldier per 43 civilians."6 Foreign policy also took a turn with the adoption of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I), The Lisbon Protocol, and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) in February of 1993. In fact the country surpassed the requirements of the Lisbon protocol by adopting a plan to rid itself of nuclear weapons in three years instead of the seven years allowed7 . During that time Belarus also declared it's Neutrality to the world. The one burden they had to carry under the Start I treaty is continued spending on disarmament. When taken in context Belarus will spend more on breaking down its military machine than either France or Britain. In 1995-96 the primary concern will be the welfare of a large ex-military population, active, on reserve, and retired. The problem of what to do with an inactive military is still a perplexing political problem that has yet to be dealt with properly. Aside from military concerns, Belarus continues to brave a new post Soviet era in a backward looking way. Constitutional infighting between Parliament, The Constitutional Court and the first elected president, recently resulted in the return of the Soviet style flag and a wish to integrate with Russia. Internally the country seems disgusted with the present lack of economic and political progress. The country is grappling with the hope that by reviving ties with Russia the situation will get better. Meanwhile, Russia seems little interested in taking on the extra burden of having to solve a full spectrum of Belarusian problems that include military restructuring, heavy industrial pollution, remnants of the Chornobyl disaster and an economy with few free market reforms. President Lukashenka, deserves to be noted as a man who is causing many of the internal problems Belarus now faces. His disregard for constitutional conventions and bullying of the election process for the prospects of a reunification with Russia have thrown the government into disarray. Using old communist election rules, Lukashenka did whatever he could to hinder the election of a new Parliament and set upon a course that might leave him holding all the legal power. Campaign funds were limited to a mere $50US and television coverage was non existent. Worse, Lukashenka made public statements on national television claiming that all the candidates of opposition were unworthy of support. Elections failed to elect enough representatives in the first and second rounds of voting to bring a Parliament to order. Everything seemed to be going according to Lukashenka's plan. However, for some unknown reason, just prior to an election the president committed political suicide when he announced, on German radio, that Adolf Hitler was a good role model for rebuilding a nation. The resulting elections not only brought a full Parliament to order, but also produced an antinationalistic response from the voters.8 Dictatorship, the prize that the president had been after evaporated before the leaders eyes. Another factor that plays in the minds of the Belarusian people is environmental pollution. The legacy of the Soviet Union left deep scars on the Republic of Belarus. Chornobyl caused a tremendous amount of ecological damage in a region that can ill afford to repair it. Aid from various external organizations has slowly been trickling in but a lack of economic strength within Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus has slowed this process. One main focus of the government over the coming years will be to receive help through international channels to deal with this nuclear nightmare. The effects of Chornobyl will shape Belarusian policy for years to come. |
| To International
interests, my government would like to present some basic points
of interest for understanding of our situation as it exists today.
The Republic of Belarus continues to strive for mutual understanding
and greater economic investment. To our West European neighbors
I would like to say that our nation continues to be a leader
in disarmament. Since 1990 Belarus has reduced it's military
presence below the levels prescribed by the Conventional Armed
Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE) though the treaty was internally
suspended by the president in 1995.9 "In February 1995, President Aleksandr Lukashenka suspended the elimination of [the] Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty limited equipment on the grounds that Belarus could not afford the economic cost. Nevertheless some 760 tanks, 350 infantry fighting vehicles and about 50 aircraft have been eliminated in the last 12 months."10 Total armed forces have dropped below the 100,000 goal11 set by our government in 1992 and a reduction in manpower of more than 60% has teken place since that time. Belarus also wishes to reaffirm previous international agreements on the removal of all nuclear weapons from it's territory. Until October of last year the Republic of Belarus was unable to comply with obligations to the START I Treaty because of environmental cleanup problems which slowed the transfer of weapons to Russia12. Belarus would like to extend a warm welcome to the Russian Republic. Recently Russian customs moved to the western borders of Belarus. We welcome the cooperation and good wishes of our Russian neighbors and will continue to work on the fundamental ground work for future reunification13 . Currently, Belarus has completed dialog and ratification of the Russian-Belarusian treaty on friendship and cooperation. This treaty creates a common trade zone between both countries for our mutual benefit and does away with the constraints of having state controlled joint ventures. Belarus continues in its efforts to conform to the IMF's policy14 but considers her trading partner more important in the days to come. Addressing Ukrainian concerns that Belarusians are loosing their sovereignty to Russia, flatly we say that this belief is false. Russia has always been a trading partner and we see no reason that we shouldn't develop this trading relationship to it's full potential. As a representative of Belarus I would also like to take the time to thank a number of nations15 for their support in dealing with the lasting legacy of Chornobyl. The international scientific community, with support from contributing nations has been extremely gracious. It is through this work that we hope to find ways to use the 30%16 of our country that has become contaminated by this disaster. The latest developments in nuclear resistant crops17 are still being researched and we feel confident that over time some of the disaster area can be reclaimed. I would also like to inform the member nations of the economic G7 that much more needs to be done. Presently two out of the four nuclear reactors at the Chornobyl site continue to threaten my country. The continued use of these reactors causes great concern and we bid the powers that be not to forget what they promised regarding shutting the Chornobyl site down. The human cost of Chornobyl must also be remembered. Research estimates indicate that one in five of our 10 million citizens have suffered some health related consequences.18 Presently Belarus "spends as much as 20 percent of it's budget each year on cleanup, medical and social benefits."19 The disaster displaced some 400,000 people in the region and is causing skyrocketing rates of radiation related sickness. "In Belarus, the incidence of thyroid cancer in children up to the age of 14 jumped dramatically"17 . We hope that future help from the international community for the region is forthcoming. |
| (1) CIA
World Factbook, 1995. http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/95fact/bo.html
(2) Reference GROAVTO map, attached. (3) Anonymous. Untitled. UNIBEL. MIT Government Document server, 1995. http://web.mit.edu/stngiam2/www/ICL/bo__indx.html (4) CIA World Factbook, 1995. (5) Markus, Ustina. "Financial Woes Lead to Halt in Disarmament". Transition Vol. 1 No. 23 November 3rd, 1995. p. 54. (6) Markus, Ustina. "Belarus Debates Security Pacts as a Cure for Military Woes," RFE/RL Research Report, no. 25, 18 June 1993. (7) Markus. "Financial Woes Lead to Halt in Disarmament". (8) Lukashenka won his 1994 election with 80% of the vote. His background has both a communist as well as a nationalistic flavor. The election of a non-nationalistic Parliament promises to add great friction to the Presidents powers. (9) Arms Control Association. "Final Weapons Reductions Under the CFE Treaty". Arms Control Today Vol. 25 No. 10 December 1995/January 1996. p. 30. Note: Final reduction numbers for January 1st 1996. (10) The International Institute for Strategic Studies. The Military Balance 1995-1996. Oxford University Press, 1996. p71. (11) Ibid. p78. (12) In reality many experts believe the prime motivation for keeping the weapons was to inspire Russia to bail out the Belarusian military. In the middle part of 1995 President Lukashenka made the announcement that the 18 remaining SS-25 Topol missiles need not be removed because Russia and Belarus might unite within a short period of time, a statement that Moscow was not fond of. The U.S. and Germany stepped in to seal the transfer by providing $230 million to complete the reduction. The Belarusian foreign ministry later announced that the real reason stemmed from the costs of environmental cleanup. -- This footnote is heavily drawn from Markus "Financial Woes Lead to Halt in Disarmament" (13) Maybe I shouldn't be that strong with a _direct_ statement of reunification. At present political discussion has been limited to action rather than hopeful talk. Quietly and persistently Belarus has been falling back under the wing of the Russian Republic. (14) The IMF suspended it's loan guarantee to Belarus because "Belarus did not adhere to its economic reform program". - Warshaw. "Reintegration With Russia, Soviet Style" Transition 3 November, 1995. p. 6. (15) Primarily Germany, Japan and the United States (16) The use of an oil producing plant that concentrates the radioactive waste in it's stem while producing a relatively uncontaminated oil seed has the potential of helping to clean the area of waste. The oil from the seed promises to be a good industrial lubricant that might be reasonable to produce. (17) Lapychak."The Chornobyl Fallout Persists" p.23 (18) Ibid. p.23 (19) Ibid. p.23 |
| Anonymous.
CIA World Factbook. U.S. Government Public Document server, 1995. http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/95fact/bo.html Cover sheet map acquired from this site. Anonymous. Untitled. UNIBEL (MIT Government Document server), 1995. http://web.mit.edu/stngiam2/www/ICL/bo__indx.html Note: Basic timetable of important events in Belarusian history. Apple, R.W. Jr. "The Growth of NATO: Will Moscow Go Along?" The New York Times 11 May, 1995. pg. A6. Arms Control Association. "Final Weapons Reductions Under the CFE Treaty". Arms Control Today Vol. 25 No. 10 December 1995/January 1996. pg. 29-30. Artsyukhovich, Alex."Virtual Guide to Belarus" http://faraday.clas.virginia.edu/~ana4a/Belarus.html A collective work of Belarusian scientists abroad, Maintained by Alex Artsyukhovich. Emblem and attached maps borrowed for this site. Baev, Pavel. "Drifting Away From Europe". Transition 30 June, 1995. pg. 30-33. Gomez, Victor. "Praise for Hitler" Transition 29 December, 1995. p. 2. Gomez, Victor. "Bring Back the Old Books" Transition 22 September, 1995. p. 40. Lapychak, Chrystyna. "The Chornobyl Fallout Persists"Transition 17 November, 1995. pg. 20-23. Markus, Ustina. "Belarus Debates Security Pacts as a Cure for Military Woes," RFE/RL Research Report, no. 25, 18 June 1993. Markus, Ustina. "Financial Woes Lead to Halt in Disarmament". Transition 3 November, 1995. p. 54. Markus, Ustina. "A New Parliament, Despite the President". Transition 12 January, 1996. pg. 62-63. Markus, Ustina. "To Counterbalance Russian Power, China Leans Toward Ukraine". Transition 22 September, 1995. pg. 34-36. Markus, Ustina. "Business as Usual With Lukashenka".Transition 26 May, 1995. pg. 57-61. Minsk Economic News (Inactive) http://gray.isir.minsk.by/NewsProcessor Bimonthly newsfeed of local Belarusian economic news. Potter, Dr. William C. "The Changing Nuclear Threat".Transition 17 November, 1995. p. 19. The International Institute for Strategic Studies. "The Military Balance" 1995-1996. London: Oxford. 1996. Warshaw, Matt. "Reintegration With Russia, Soviet Style". Transition 3 November, 1995. pg. 58-62. "Elimination of Nuclear Weapons" Webmaster: Hiroyuki Yamamoto http://www.infoweb.or.jp/scc/eg/nuclear.html Compilation of RFE/RL Daily Reports which include Belarus as a topic. Article archive for the year 1994. http://www.missouri.edu/~ras/rfe/rfebelarus.html |
| ©TBennett 3/96,
please cite this text if you use it! Bennett, T. "On Troubled Waters: Belarusian Foreign Policy" 1996. http://www.mindspring.com/~tbennett/belarus.htm |