Andrei Khrapavitski: Belarusian American Blog

I’ve just finished reading Timothy Snyder’s impressive volume “The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, 1569-1999.” Although this book is not as detailed about Belarus as about the intricacies of Polish-Ukrainian and Polish-Lithuanian relations within the nation-building process, I’d still highly recommend this book to anyone interested in Belarus as part of the greater regional context. The author offered quite a realistic and unbiased narrative about the occurrence of nation-states in place of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, which Belarus and Ukraine were integral parts of. Whereas Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine succeeded in this “reconstruction” process, Belarus failed due to a bunch of reasons enumerated in this book. Here’s just a small extract on this issue:

Tradition involves what people actually do now, whereas history narrates what people supposedly once did. Where tradition stops and history begins appears to depend a great deal upon the social origins of national activists. Here again the Lithuanians enjoyed an unexpected advantage over the Belarusians. Activists of humble social origins, whose families never played any role in early modern politics, found it easier to treat the entire past as history. Lithuanian activists, often Russian-educated peasant sons, happily skipped over several centuries and spoke of rebirth. Belarusian activists, Polish-speaking Roman Catholic gentry, were bogged down in the received truth of the actual tradition they learned from their parents and grandparents.

I can’t agree more.

OK, here’s another laughable story for you. As I wrote earlier, BPF Party has recently elected a new leader, Yanukevich, who was in opposition to the old party elite.

The party did not split as it had happened in the past when an old party leader could not accept to cooperate with a new one. The old leader would just bang the door, taking his supporters with him. That was before. Now our democratic parties are becoming more democratic and tolerant, aren’t they?

Well, let’s just say that somebody’s hands are itching to put stokes into the wheels of the newly elected party leader and council. According to the Belarusian blogosphere, a webmaster, loyal to the previous leader, is refusing to pass passwords and website requisites to the new team. Thus they can’t update the party website. A source in the party revealed that they are now thinking of registering a new domain to bypass the obstacle.

Can you imagine anything like that happening in your country? For example, what if Bush web team refused to pass control to Obama’s team over whitehouse.gov? Belarus is surely a pretty odd place.

Here’s an interesting take from TED Fellow and Belarusian journalist Evgeny Morozov on the ways the Internet can actually help oppressive regimes stifle dissent.

I agree with most of his points. Especially, I concur with him that support for NGOs, dissidents, intellectuals is very important. Simply relying on the spread of Internet per capita won’t do the job. However, we shouldn’t underestimate the role of the new media in democratization. What is basically flawed (not in Evgeny’s speech, but in general) is how the pace of Internetization in Belarus is measured by various statistical institutions. Yes, there are lots of people who have access to the Internet, but the availability of a computer connected to the Web does not necessarily presuppose quality usage. Still too few Belarusians buy stuff online, read news, work online, etc. Due to Internet expensiveness, far too many simply check their e-mail accounts or read anecdotes. This may change when Internet becomes more widely available and less expensive.

Evgeny is right to say that the authoritarian governments have learned to use the Net for their cause (I like the term Spinsternet he invented). In fact, it would be naive to hope that the regime would keep out of the Web while opposition used it so voraciously. Yes, it makes our job harder when government spin doctors infest the Belarusian segment of the Web with pro-Lukashenka propaganda (it is already happening). However, I wouldn’t look at this as at the online battle of opposition vs the dictatorship. The Web is an invaluable source for disseminating news. It our job (journalists, NGOs, intellectuals) to make our sites more attractive, more interesting, more regularly updated, more inventive, more user-friendly, more Web2.0, more next-gen. Yes, if we allow discussion, spin doctors might join. But so will others, those who can tell truth from lies and who can post counterarguments. We shouldn’t worry about them infiltrating our sites, we should work hard to make our online presence as high quality as possible.

19 September, 1991, the white-red-white flag was voted to become the official flag of Belarus. Just in few years, it would be scrapped by Alexander Lukashenka. Since 1995, Belarus has lived under the soviet-style symbols again.

There’s a myth circulated by some media outlets that back in 1991 Lukashenka was the one who carried the white-red-white banner into the house of the Belarusian parliament after the flag was voted to become an official symbol of the country. Well, he wasn’t the one who carried the flag, but, indeed, he partook in the procession by walking next to Uladzimir Kavalyonak, the one with the flag.

As RFE\RL reports, Lukashenka continued to wear a Belarusian Soviet Republic flag pin on his lapel even after the historical symbol change. And soon after Lukashenka had become president, he scrapped the white-red-white flag together with historical Pahonia emblem and returned our country under the soviet symbols. Since then the white-red-white banner has been tabooed from public use. It is mostly seen at opposition rallies, nonprofit organizations’ offices, etc. Even the most casual use, for instance, a white-red-white flag pin, may raise some eyebrows when spotted by the police.

Wearing a now-official red-green flag is also a political statement. Of course, there are many people who simply have to wear the current symbols on their military or police uniforms, athletes wear red-green T’s, so on. But apart from these groups of people, common folk hardly ever put a flag on unless they want to demonstrate their political standpoint (it’s not just in Belarus but in many countries). The red-green is usually pinned on by members of the Belarusian Republican Union of Youth (the union is pro-Lukashenka), but even many of these youngsters are not true believers in the symbolism of Lukashenka-styled Belarus, they just submit.

Lukashenka, similarly to many dictators, has used pots of money to nurture love for his symbols. Remember military parades, social billboards and placards, various patriotic events. I don’t know. Maybe this has yielded some fruit. But youth is not so inclined to show love for the red-green. The white-red-white is a statement of dissent and many young people are attracted to the flag endorsed by many a rock band and their counterparts. For them, the white-red-white flag is not just about Belarusian history, it’s about the European choice, it’s about the future they do not see possible under the soviet symbols.

It’s a pity so little is written on Belarus in English these days. No, I don’t mean blunt news translations published on a bunch of websites. I don’t mean analytical summaries printed by think tanks, RFE\RL, some foundations, etc. There are just a handful of English-language blogs focusing on this country. Very few are regularly updated. Blogs on Belarusian issues is what we badly lack. Wouldn’t it be great to read more personal stories, unspoiled by heavy analytical argot, party politics, etiquette prescriptions, etc. Bloggers, however unqualified, mediocre, amateurish they may be, are a great source to find out about the real state of things, because bloggers tend to write about the things they are personally involved with, worried about, agree or disagree with. Blogs are always fun.

That is exactly why we, at westki.info (a regional news project I work for), allow each and every user to have a blog on our Web site. Of course, there are some downsides of this. Once in a while, somebody registers and posts a slandering piece or something that only a KGB agent may write. Sometimes, the editors need to take it down or even block an abusive user’s account. But such cases are rare. Blogs have given our site the vibe of unpredictability and personal involvement of the people from our target audience.

In fact, blogs have become, I guess, the most vibrant part of the Belarusian Internet with users galore in both Belarusian and Russian on popular blogging platforms such as Livejournal.com and TUT.by. It’s a pity there are very few in English.

I’ve been running this blog for almost four years. It is now one of the oldest English-language blogs about Belarus. With so few colleagues I have, I feel a need to continue.

VIRGINIA – on July 17, 2009 a federal judge sentenced Viktar Krus to 7 years in prison for creating and running an illegal ring that supplied cheap workers to the East Coast resorts and railroad yards. 22 other co-defendants have been convicted in the case.

(read on at Bielar.us blog)

Ever since the 2006 presidential campaign, the biggest Belarusian independent newspaper Narodnaya Volya has been cold, even inimical towards Milinkevich. But now the newspaper’s bias against this politician has gone a bit too far.

Last week, Narodnaya Volya published an article by Mikhail Podolyak titled “Bleacher M.” In this opus, Milinkevich was accused of being part of a secret plot between him, Lukashenka, and some European political forces. Podolyak claimed there was a European plan “Solana/Lukashenka.” According to this plan, Milinkevich would be given a post inside the Belarusian government and Lukashenka would get another legitimized presidential term. In their turn, Europeans would win favorable conditions for business in Belarus.

Podolyak unveiled that, during the next presidential elections, Milinkevich would become a “technical” candidate, supported by Europe, he would get some 20-25% votes and would be offered a post of the vice president in the next Lukashenka’s cabinet. The latter would most certainly win the vote with triumph, wrote Podolyak. (more…)

Today is another day of heavy bombardment. A group of Catholic monarchists is attacking the pagan front for their alleged neo-Nazi views, the traditionalists are shooting back. With my Logitech mouse, I make a couple of scrolls down, and here I am on another battlefield, this time it’s between the liberals and paleoconservatives. Yet another scroll, and I am amidst the heavy fighting between the national democrats and the creoles.

Following Belarusian blogs through my Livejournal friends’ feed, I am subjected to a never-ending culture war between diverse socio-political groups and subcultures. Identities, worldviews clash nonstop, no ceasefire here. (more…)

There’s been a lot going on in Poland over the last couple of weeks. All of a sudden, Agnieszka Romaszewska-Guzy, who served as the director of TV Polonia (Public TV in Poland) and also as the director of Belsat TV, was fired from both her positions.

Belsat TV – set up by the Polish government and public television in Poland - symbolizes freedom for Belarusians, and Romaszewska-Guzy was a modernizer who sought to develop and foster free media in Belarus, writes Polskieradio.pl.

In solidarity with Romaszewska, Paval Mazheika, a popular talk show host on Belsat, announced his resignation from the channel.

Polska (Times) claims that the firing of the director of Belsat television, Agnieszka Romaszewska-Guzy, proves that the new president of TVP public television in Poland supports President Aleksander Lukashenko, and is a major blow to free media initiatives in Belarus.

The president of TVP Piotr Farfal, who was recently appointed to the position, is described by the Polish media as “a former editor of a Polish neo-Nazi magazine.” Check out his bio, you’ll be surprised. Farfal was reportedly a skinhead and a radical Polish nationalist.

Gazeta.pl quotes Piotr Farfal as saying “I don’t see why TVP (Polish Television) should finance Belsat TV. [Polish] television does not have a spare dime for Belsat. If the government wants this channel, let them cover the full cost of its maintenance.” Farfał underscored that “In accordance with its bylaws, TVP is not an institution obliged to produce a channel broadcasting in a foreign language to non-Polish people.”

“The transmission is carried out first and foremost for Poles. Hence I agree to the need for additional financing of TVP Polonia, which is produced for Polish expatriates, but why should TVP produce television for Belarusians for our money – that I do not understand,” said Mr. Farfal.

I understand the economic crisis is the time when it is hard to justify maintaining a satellite channel for a foreign country (especially, if you have a rightwing point of view at the world around you). But how can a rightwing politician (with such credentials) or how, actually, any politician whatsoever be appointed to preside over the public television institution in a democratic country? That I do not understand.

It’s like driving in the opposing lane
It’s like waking up into another migraine
It’s the morning in Vilnius, the nation wakes up
Shakes off all its stilts but fails to stand up

It is so hard to see through this rain what’s at stake
When there’s nothing to give and too little to take
All is washed away, all goes down the drain
But you’re proud of your nation, proud of your chain

Like a dog on a leash, you are strapped to a place
You’re disguising your pain with a smile on your face
It’s the morning in Minsk, the nation wakes up
Shakes off all its stilts but fails to get up

They shenanigan us with those history books
We are under control of political crooks
We have slurred ourselves more than enough
But we can’t take a stand, we just cannot get up