Paul
Goble
Staunton, April 17 – Last month, a
group of foreign policy and security analysts from Europe and the United States assembled in Warsaw as the International Strategic Action Network for Society
(iSANS) to compile and discuss a 120-page report on what it called Russia’s ‘creeping
attack” on Belarusian sovereignty, moves intended to end with Moscow’s absorption of that
country.
Because so many of the participants have
close ties with governments in the region and because the situation is so
fluid, the conference and the report were “off the record.” But participants
have allowed Belarusian opposition journalist Aleksandr Otroshenkov to publish
excerpts of it (reform.by/isans-dlya-russia-pogloshcheniye-belarus/).
Below are the key
points of the report, which has attracted a great deal of attention in the Russian
patriotic media, that the Belarusian journalist has published in what he
describes as the first installment. When he posts more online, Window on
Eurasia will do a follow on to include them as well.
·
“Russia is
exerting active, serious and growing pressure on the information and social
space of Belarus through various channels.”
·
“In recent months,
this attack has acquired the character of ‘a hybrid war.’ Governmental, quasi-private,
and non-government initiatives form a broad system of influence directed at so-called
‘deep integration.’”
·
“Pro-Russian
influence is being conducted in a directed and coordinated fashion by the Presidential
Administration of Russia. It is being financed from government and private sources
and carried out by Russian and Belarusian actors, united in several networks.”
·
“The organizers
and executors of the anti-Belarusian action are mostly politicians and activists
who promote an imperial, Russian-nationalist, sharply conservative, extreme
right and anti-Western ideology. Many of them took an active part in the
preparation and carrying out of aggression in Ukraine and in earlier conflicts
in which Russia was a participant.”
·
This effort along
with economic pressure will grow in the runup to the Belarusian presidential
and parliamentary elections in 2019-2020. The absorption of Belarus is to take
place no later than 2023-2024, but it may occur earlier.
·
“Lukashenka is not
a real guarantor of the independence of his country. He is an irrational player
who holds onto power as a guarantee of his own security and does not wish to
carry out any real reforms.”
·
“However toothless
it seems at present, the Union State to a large extent provides legal cover for
the carrying out of various projects and activities, the final goal of which is
the incorporation of Belarus” into the Russian Federation and “in fact, the restoration
of the Russian Empire in new borders.”
·
Among the means
Moscow is using to support this drive are the corruption of local elites and
military officers, the deployment of pro-Russian activists within Belarus,
massive financing of pro-Russian groups there, massive propaganda attacks via
Russian television, and “the establishment of a propaganda network around and
within the state being attacked consisting of a large number of propagandistic
sites, pages, and account sin social networks for promoting a pro-imperial
ideology.”
·
A turning point in
this effort came in December 2011 when Grigory Rapota, a senior KGB general and
foreign intelligence operative with great experience of work in the western
direction” became secretary of the Union State.
It is interesting that his successor in his former place of work – as plenipotentiary
for the Volga Federal District – then became Mikhail Babich, the current
Russian ambassador in Belarus.”
·
Moscow’s effort
against Belarus has been designed by the same people who took the lead in designing
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, including most prominently Vladislav Surkov and
Sergey Glazyev.
·
“If between 2014
and 2016, the situation in Belarus often was treated in public in Russia
together with the ‘Ukrainian’ question, over the last two years, one must note
that Belarus has become ever more a separate subject.” And in recent months, it
has been subject to especially harsh and even scurrilous attacks.
·
Such attacks
started in the nationalist and imperialist media but have become mainstream,
with memes promoted earlier only by marginal groups now at the center of
discussion in state media.
No comments:
Post a Comment