The Tribulations of Triangulation: Few Options for Belarus Amid a Color
Revolution
Belarus shows that any small state with a mildly socialist system and
independent foreign policy invites subversion by the Yankee hegemon and its
collaborators.
by Roger D. Harris
August 24th, 2020
By Roger D. Harris
A"color revolution" is a media term for a movement based on legitimate
grievances only to be co-opted into a regime change operation backed by the
US and confederates. There have been so many - Georgia in 2003, Ukraine in
2004, Kyrgyzstan in 2005 - that they have run out of colors. Belarus is
amidst the "slipper" color revolution.
The last Soviet republic
Belarus, a former constituent republic of the USSR, declared its sovereignty
in 1990 with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Under its new and now
contested President Alexander Lukashenko, first elected in 1994, Belarus
rejected the western-imposed "economic shock therapy" that looted the public
wealth of many of the other former Soviet republics.
Earning the sobriquet of the "last Soviet republic," Belarus retained
state-run industry and agriculture, the social safety net, and the relative
equality of the socialist period. Along with that came the enduring Cold War
enmity of the US and its NATO epigones.
In contrast, the newly "liberated" Russian Federation, with its US-installed
leader Boris Yeltsin and its cabal of nouveau riche oligarchs, was plundered
by western capital. (Note: The Slavs have "oligarchs," while the US has
"philanthropists" like Turner, Gates, and Soros.) Its standard of living,
social services, and life expectancy went into freefall. Initially, Belarus
was more prosperous than Russia, but as the Belarusian economy slowed in the
early 2000s, the Russian economy surged with the ascendance of Vladimir
Putin.
The sprawling US embassy in Belarus occupies an area the size of a city
block. Clearly, the Yanks do more than just issue visas. The US is
preoccupied with regime change. In 2004, the US passed the Belarus Democracy
Act overtly funding anti-government NGOs in Belarus and prohibiting loans.
The tribulations of triangulation
The official languages of Belarus are Belarusian and Russian. Some 80% of
the population is ethnic Belarusian followed by Russian. In 2000, Belarus
and Russia established the Union State, a supranational confederation for
economic integration and common defense. Though the two sovereigns declared
the goal of a single entity, efforts at implementation have variously been
stalled by Lukashenko.
Russia sells oil and natural gas to Belarus at discounted rates. Belarus
permits Russia to have a missile defense system on its territory, which is
considered a critical deterrent against a NATO nuclear first strike.
Following the US-backed coup in neighboring Ukraine in 2014, Lukashenko took
a more independent, nationalist tack, reflecting the predicament of Belarus
as a buffer between Russia and an increasingly aggressive NATO. Lukashenko
has tried to triangulate between Russia and the West. Muammar Gaddafi chose
a similarly conciliatory path, which ended badly for him and his country.
Internationally, Belarus has sided mainly with Russia in addition to
upholding Palestinian rights, warm relations with Venezuela, and trade with
Syria. From Washington's perspective, these have been fatal moves for
Lukashenko. But the primary motivator of US foreign policy - with Lithuania,
Latvia, and Estonia joining NATO in 2004 and post-coup Ukraine likely on the
way - is to complete the military occupation of Russia's western border.
Hence "Europe's last dictator" must go.
Playing both carrot and stick, US Secretary of State Pompeo visited Belarus
last February to conclude an oil deal to wean Belarus from dependence on
Russian-sourced petrol. Then in April, the US and Belarus reestablished
diplomatic relations.
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the quasi-governmental US agency
which does legally what the CIA does extra-legally, currently lists projects
in Belarus euphemistically described as "developing civil society,"
"fostering freedom of the media," and "fostering youth activism." They sound
so good that one might wish for the NED to import some "pro-democracy
measures" back to the homeland.
Legitimate protest morphs in a reactionary direction
In the run-up to the August 9 presidential election in Belarus, credible
reports circulated of suppression of the opposition. Lukashenko won with a
less than credible 80% of the vote. Still, most observers not aligned with
the regime-change project believe he carried a majority.
The runner-up candidate, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, received 10% of the vote.
She absconded to Lithuania after the election, where she proclaimed herself
the winner and ready to lead Belarus. The West now has their puppet
president in exile.
Belarus protests
A woman embraces a soldier guarding the Belarusian Government building in
Minsk, Belarus, Aug. 14, 2020. Sergei Grits | AP
Mass protests, including a showing of industrial workers, erupted calling
not only for "free and fair elections," but for total system change. A
national protest strike, centered in Minsk, is in the making.
Angry young people wave the red and white flag that was flown during the
Nazi occupation, as the opposition protest morphs into a force aligned with
the West and against anything Russian. While the leadership of these
protests is deeply anti-Russian, most of the protestors are not. But the
winds of xenophobia are being fanned. An initially legitimate protest
movement is being co-opted by foreign interests.
A complete reorientation
The call for "democracy" raises the question of democracy for whom and under
what kind of system. A coalition of opposition groups published a program of
the Belarusian opposition. Among the sponsors of the program is the USAID,
the cover agency for the CIA. A nearly identical document had been
promulgated in 2014 after the Ukrainian coup.
This published opposition program calls for a complete reorientation of the
Belarusian state and society from east to west and the establishment of a
neoliberal political economy.
Politically, Belarus would withdraw from the Union State and all other
structures where Russia is prominent and join the European Union and NATO.
In conjunction with the privatization of state enterprises and the creation
of a thorough market economy, purchase of Belarusian enterprises by Russia
would be prohibited while being opened to western corporate interests.
Russian media along with scientific and cultural exchanges would be
suppressed. The official use of the Russian language would be banned in a
nation where 70% speak Russian at home. Even the Belarusian Orthodox Church
would replace the Belarusian Exarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church. The
embers of reactionary nationalism would be fanned.
The situation is volatile
By just about all accounts, Lukashenko's 26-year rule of Belarus degenerated
with questionable elections, authoritarian practices, mismanagement, and
corruption. Even if Lukashenko won the last election, he has lost much of
his credibility with his people, certainly with the West, and even with his
Russian ally.
The US involvement in Belarus is not nearly as overt as it was in the
Ukraine coup and, given the circumstances, may not need to be to achieve
desired outcomes. Obama's former deputy national security advisor, Ben
Rhodes, tweeted on August 11: "Americans have to recognize that the fight
against Lukashenko in Belarus is our fight."
Similarly, the UK, France, and Germany are fishing in these troubled waters
along with Poland and the Baltic states. While Russia and China have
recognized Lukashenko's election, they have not more vigorously supported
him publicly.
Belarus protester
Police beat a protester at a rally following the presidential election in
Minsk, Belarus, Aug. 11, 2020. Photo | AP
Lukashenko may have thought through the consequences of his previous stance:
"There will be no other elections, unless you kill me." He appears to have
reassessed his options and is triangulating back towards the Union State
with Russia in hopes of weathering the protests and, perhaps, holding
elections in the new state.
The West is bent on Lukashenko's ouster and Putin is at best lukewarm.
Domestically the intelligentsia are alienated, workers discontented, and
even his security services show signs of disloyalty. Lukashenko may try to
save his skin and the quasi-socialist state he founded by a "phased
leadership transition."
A small fish in a superpower sea
Despite the complexity of contending interests, international law and the
principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of sovereign states
must be upheld. Belarus needs to have the freedom to resolve the crisis
without outside interference.
Based on the examples of Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, and Poland, Armin
Fischer, a German observer, warns that a color revolution in Belarus could
bring:
the liquidation of state enterprises, mass layoffs, collapse of collective
farms, mass exodus from the countryside and the death of
villages.disintegration of the social infrastructure of daycare centers,
hospitals, old people's homes and the consequences for life expectancy,
alcoholism and neglect.. In return, you will certainly get new oligarchs."
"Free elections," Fischer admonishes, would bring the "freedom" to be
migrant workers competing for low-paying, undesirable jobs in Western
Europe.
The leaders of the eighteen Communist parties of the former Soviet republics
recall the consequences of the dissolution of the USSR in their August 18th
statement on Belarus:
In Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Russia, and Tajikistan, a bloody
conflagration of fratricidal interethnic war broke out. In the Baltic
States, the neo-fascists who came to power staged a real apartheid - they
divided the entire population of their 'independent,' 'democratic' States
into 'citizens' and disenfranchised sub-humans, the so-called
'non-citizens.'"
Belarus under Lukashenko has its faults. Even so, a neoliberal coup would be
worse for the people. The economic collapse of post-coup Ukraine, now the
poorest country in Europe, serves as a cautionary example. Those who condemn
the excesses of the present government need also consider the greater
bloodbaths that followed rightist putsches in other former Soviet republics.
George W. Bush's declaration of "you're either with us or with the
terrorists" epitomizes the dilemma of Belarus in a world dominated by a
hegemonic superpower. The playbook is familiar. Years of foreign subversion
feeding on genuine domestic discontent erupts into an orchestrated regime
change movement.
Belarus shows that any small state with a mildly socialist system and
independent foreign policy invites subversion by the Yankee hegemon and its
collaborators. Even if Belarus had met the highest standards of democracy
and efficiency, a western-backed color revolution might not have been
avoided.
