The bully of Belarus: Russia must tell Lukashenko to shape up

The bully of Belarus: Russia must tell Lukashenko to shape up
The Guardian - United Kingdom; Sep 11, 2001

Belarus is Europe's rogue state, what US secretary of state Colin Powell calls its 'lone, remaining outlaw'. Under Alexander Lukashenko's brand of old-school totalitarianism, the former Soviet republic has clung stubbornly to the past. For Belarus's ruler, if not its people, EU and Nato blandishments, to which neighbours have succumbed, hold scant attraction. Free enterprise is a foreign concept in a command economy in which 80% of workers depend on the state. Democratic institutions are another alien idea. Mr Lukashenko has neutered parliament, intimidated independent media, eliminated rivals (if his former chief executioner is to be believed), and now, it seems, rigged his own re-election. OSCE monitors declared yesterday that Sunday's vote was a fix. There is no reason to doubt this verdict; or that his opponent, Vladimir Goncharik, never had a hope of a fair fight. In making Belarus the modern-day equivalent of Enver Hoxha's Albania, Mr Lukashenko has re peatedly shown his contempt for western values and standards. In his twisted view, the monitors are all spies anyway.

Mr Lukashenko is an unpleasant man who does not matter much. Unlike other such rogues, he does not pose a threat to the west; merely an affront. But Belarus's people deserve better. The US and the EU should now review their policy of ostracism, as urged by the OSCE mission. It clearly has not worked and risks making of Belarus another Iran or North Korea. Knee-jerk sanctions would be the wrong way to go. But in terms of history, geography, and Mr Lukashenko's reunification aspirations, Russia has most influence. Although President Vladimir Putin, resigned to 'losing' the Baltic republics, may like having a bolshie buffer on his western border, he should warn the Belarus bully that sooner or later, he will lose his grip. Better to embrace reform now than risk a revolution later. In Mr Putin's putative 'European family', Mr Lukashenko is a black sheep.

Lukashenka is a monster. Everybody knows it. Even Stavka2. Thank God there are Brits who want to educate us and show us the ultimate perversion of The Monster.

Leading article: Europe should heed the threat of its last dictator
The Independent - United Kingdom; Sep 11, 2001

ON THE list of small countries of which we know little, Belarus, perched on the western edge of Russia, must rank near the top. It may well be time, however, for us to start learning more.

The Belarus President, Alexander Lukashenko, has just been elected for a second five-year term in what was, by common consent, a rigged election. Even if the ballot boxes were not literally stuffed, opponents were intimidated; the main opposition leader was the object of a relentless smear campaign, and independent information sources were censored.

The result leaves Mr Lukashenko as Europe's last autocrat, and the unfortunate Belarus an anachronism. Ten years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the ambitions that Belarus once had to be a democratic and independent state are in tatters. In Eastern Europe, even such renegades as Albania and Serbia have now signed up to democracy. Only Belarus lingers, a Soviet state in miniature, complete with mysterious disappearances, a "planned" economy that is failing, political lies and a personality cult.

In what was arguably its heyday, immediately after the break-up of the Soviet Union, Belarus saw its future in becoming the "Brussels" of the post-Soviet grouping of states. It paraded its language (long dismissed by Moscow as a mere dialect) and toyed with the novelty of free information. All those gains were progressively lost after Mr Lukashenko became President seven years ago. If he fulfils his commitment to re-merge Belarus fully with Russia, the one post-Soviet gain remaining - independent statehood - will go the same way.

After cold-shouldering Belarus through the Lukashenko years, however, the rest of Europe would do well to wake up to the risks. While 10 million Belarussians in thrall to a minor dictator may not seem to matter too much to us now, they could matter soon. As the European Union and Nato expand to the east, Belarus becomes a front-line state, with the choice to be a bridge or a bulwark.

Russia, to its credit, has so far resisted Mr Lukashenko's approach for a union, but may not do so forever. If economic destitution threatens, the mass of disillusioned Belarussians may turn not to the West that has shunned them, but to the east. For want of outside support, the young shoots of democracy that pushed tentatively to the surface in this election may wither. We must do all that we can to sustain them.

All Material Subject to Copyright

For your enjoyment. There is nothing funnier than observing the neo-commie monkeys (and certain American reeker).

WORLD NEWS - EUROPE: Belarus poll criticism casts shadow over loan prospects
Financial Times; Sep 11, 2001
By ROBERT COTTRELL and TOM WARNER

Western governments and international financial institutions face tough decisions about Belarus, diplomats say, after damning criticism of Sunday's presidential election by observers from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

President Alexander Lukashenko claimed re-election yesterday with 75.6 per cent of the vote. His nearest challenger, Vladimir Goncharik, a trade unionist, received 15.4 per cent, according to government figures, which Mr Goncharik disputes. A few votes remained to be counted from overseas.

The US has called Belarus the "lone outlaw" of Europe, a reference to Mr Lukashenko's autocratic style and anti-western rhetoric. But European politicians warn against isolation. "You may want to isolate a regime, but you end up isolating a people," says Stef Goris, Belgian head of the monitoring team sent to Belarus by the Council of Europe's parliamentary assembly.

Kimmo Kiljunen, Finnish co-ordinator of the OSCE's 293-strong monitoring mission, said yesterday the presidential election "failed to meet" international standards. Voting on Sunday was lawful and orderly, the OSCE mission said. But it listed a catalogue of abuses in preceding weeks.

It accused the Belarus government of "doing everything in its power to block the opposition". It identified a "campaign of intimidation" against opposition activists and independent media. It said excessive rule by presidential decree led to "arbitrary changing of the election environment".

Some other observers, including a delegation from the Commonwealth of Independent States, gave the elections a near-clean bill of health. President Vladimir Putin of Russia called Mr Lukashenko yesterday to congratulate him.

The controversy over the election may set back Belarus's attempts to improve its relations with the international financial institutions.

The charter of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development limits its lending to countries "applying the principles of multi-party democracy". These have included Belarus. But "it is difficult to say which way the bank will jump (on further lending)", says one source. "It will be a political decision."

The International Monetary Fund halted lending to Belarus in 1995 when Mr Lukashenko's government rejected economic reforms. In March this year co-operation resumed with a six-month IMF "staff-monitored programme". This does not include lending but tests the government's capacity to meet policy targets.

Mark Horton, IMF representative for Belarus, said the IMF would "continue to evaluate how economic policy evolves". But "the political context in which economic policy is made also has an importance," he said.

In any case, said Mr Horton, Belarus was having difficulty meeting the targets of the staff-monitored programme. "We have had to inform the authorities that there will not be an automatic move to a standby (loan programme)," he said.

The World Bank is drafting a "country assistance strategy" for Belarus that could mean loans of up to Dollars 260m (Pounds 186m) in 2002-2004. Its policy is to lend on economic criteria only but its draft programme includes health and environmental projects using co-funding from other governments and donors which could be threatened.

EU holds talks with Ukraine

EU leaders arrived in Yalta last night to meet Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma and hold the fifth annual EU-Ukraine summit, writes Tom Warner in Kiev.

The delegation, led by European Commission president Romano Prodi and Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy supremo, was expected to press Ukraine to uphold democratic standards in next year's parliamentary election.

Diplomats fear eventual EU enlargement - which would take the EU's border up to Ukraine - could destabilise the country or increase its dependence on Russia.

Just in case you freaks missed it.

A panel will decide Tuesday how closely to monitor the use of computers by federal judges and their staffs. Choices range from a proposal for extensive monitoring to no monitoring whatsoever, the demand of some judges. (http://www.ptd.net/webnews/wed/bv/Ajudges-privacy.R5RQ_BSA.html)

Some privacy advocates had said an original proposal for close checks would have opened the 30,000 court employees, among them about 1,800 judges, to extensive illegal monitoring.

Court administrators contend their close-monitoring recommendation was simply to keep employees from spending work time downloading music or pornography from the Internet.

Nevertheless, the proposal has been toned down to a less-invasive one that is going before the Judicial Conference, the courts' governing board of 27 judges. The judges, meeting privately Tuesday to settle the issue, could accept either level of monitoring or accede to significant remaining objections and ban all monitoring.

While still allowing monitoring, the revised proposal would not require employees to give up all expectations of privacy while using e-mail or the Internet.

The revised proposal follows a model used by federal agencies. It says employees may use computers for personal business if it is done outside work hours, is inexpensive and does not interfere with agency operations. Employees may not gamble or download or view pornography.

The change was among two recommended by monitoring supporter Leonidas Ralph Mecham, director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. They were approved Sunday by the Committee on Automation and Technology, a judges group that proposes policy for the Judicial Conference.

Mecham also opposed use of notification on computers that would warn users they were consenting to the recording and reviewing of their activities. Mecham said that method "could unduly alarm judges and other employees about the level of monitoring that is actually being performed."

Mecham said in a letter to the committee chairman that "concerns for the need for privacy appear to have, at least temporarily, taken precedence, for the most part because of widespread misunderstanding and, indeed, worry among judges."

Mecham's office had already started Internet monitoring, which prompted some judges to protest by disabling monitoring software.

One protester, Judge Alex Kozinski of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, said in an open letter to federal judges that the initial proposal treated employees "as if they live in a gulag," a forced labor camp.

He said its adoption would "betray ourselves, our employees and all those who look to the federal courts for guidance in adopting policies that are both lawful and enlightened."

Kozinski also wants the Judicial Conference to apologize to employees whose Internet activities were monitored and clear the records of any reprimanded. He said there should be an investigation to see if any laws were broken.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, said Monday he was pleased with the automation committee's proposed policy changes.

"It's almost been assumed that the more monitoring the better," he said. "The judiciary has kind of put a brake on this, which is good."

The committee made additional recommendations, including banning court workers from using Napster and Gnutella services to download music.

(http://www.ptd.net/webnews/wed/bv/Ajudges-privacy.R5RQ_BSA.html)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.