Sentences for anarchists
On 27 May a court sentenced 5 youth activists from the anarchist movement to prison terms ranging from 2 to 8 years. In particular, the defendants were accused of buring the building of the Russian Embassy in Minsk in 2010, as well as staging a series of demonstrations in the capital city in 2009.
Actions of the authorities follow their own logic. Sentences for the Belarusian Anarchists were tougher than those handed down to the post-elections protestors because they were not part of the formal opposition.
Thereby the rest of the informal Belarusian youth structures, who theoretically could become politically active (for instance, the “White Legion”, the “White Will” or a community of football fans) received an unambiguous signal on the ban on such activities. The mass detention of participants in the annual cycling event in Minsk, “Critical Mass”, which is usually held with the support of the Road Police of the City Executive Committee, also confirms this trend.
However, one should not assume that the authorities designed a plan of suppression of civil and political activity in the country. It is more likely that the authorities react quasi-instinctively to the actions of citizens, and that harsh actions by the law enforcement and judicial system imply weakness rather than strength of the state.
Over the past year, military-political relations between Minsk and Kyiv have become complicated. Due to their high inertia and peculiarities, this downward trend would be extremely difficult to overcome.
The root cause of the crisis is the absence of a common political agenda in the Belarusian-Ukrainian relations. Minsk is looking for a market for Belarusian exports in Ukraine and offers its services as a negotiation platform for the settlement of the Russo-Ukrainian war, thereby hoping to avoid political issues in the dialogue with Kiev. Meanwhile, Ukraine is hoping for political support from Minsk in the confrontation with Moscow. In addition, Ukraine’s integration with NATO presupposes her common position with the Alliance in relation to Belarus. The NATO leadership regards the Belarusian Armed Forces as an integral part of the Russian military machine in the western strategic front (the Baltic states and Poland). In addition, the ongoing military reform in Ukraine envisages a reduction in the number of generals and the domestic political struggle makes some Ukrainian top military leaders targets in politically motivated attacks.
Hence, the criticism of Belarus coming from Ukrainian military leadership is dictated primarily by internal and external political considerations, as well as by the need to protect the interests of generals, and only then by facts.
For instance, initially, the Ukrainian military leadership made statements about 100,000 Russian servicemen allegedly taking part in the Russo-Belarusian military drill West-2017. Then the exercises were labelled quazi-open and military observers from Ukraine refused to provide their assessment, which caused a negative reaction in Minsk. Further, without citing specific facts, it was stated that Russia was building up its military presence in Belarus.
Apparently, the Belarusian and Ukrainian Defence Ministries have entangled in a confrontational spiral (on the level of rhetoric). Moreover, only a small part of the overly hidden process has been disclosed. That said, third states are very likely to take advantage of the situation (or have already done so). This is not only about Russia.
The Belarusian Defence Ministry officials are restrained in assessing their Ukrainian counterparts. However, such a restraint is not enough. Current military-political relations between Belarus and Ukraine are unlikely to stabilise without the intervention of both presidents.