Executive summary:
I. BELARUS
- The presidential election scheduled for January 26, 2025 has become the main topic in the news and agenda of the government-controlled media. Despite the absence of alternative candidates and political struggle, the Lukashenka regime fears new protests and unrest. In these conditions, the task of propaganda is to consolidate the society around the current “president” as much as possible in the face of “external threats.”
- December 8 marked the 25th anniversary of the “Union State.” The more Belarus becomes dependent on Russia, the louder propagandists talk about the “fraternal union” and “friendship forever.” At the same time, Lukashenka himself from time to time gently reminds about Belarus’ autonomy and its independence from Russia.
- Propaganda enthusiastically discussed the signing of a new security treaty between Russia and Belarus in December, as well as Putin’s promises to provide Minsk with Oreshnik ballistic missiles.
II. BELARUS’ DEMOCRATIC FORCES
- Ahead of the election, propaganda is intensifying its campaign to discredit, intimidate and divide the democratic movement.
III. UKRAINE
- Belarusian government-controlled media continue to justify Russian aggression and war crimes in Ukraine.
- At the same time, propagandists are increasingly calling for peace talks, in which Belarus should be given the role of an equal participant.
- Propagandists continue to justify the illegal deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia and Belarus.
IV. THE “COLLECTIVE WEST”
- The tone of statements against Western countries remains aggressively bellicose. At the same time, the government-controlled media send signals to the West about readiness for negotiations and normalization of relations.
- Poland and Lithuania remain the main targets of anti-Western propaganda.
- In December, state television aired two “spy” propaganda films aimed at discrediting the Polish government.
V. SITUATION IN SYRIA
- The overthrow of dictator Bashar al-Assad and the victory of the armed opposition in Syria were clearly seen by propaganda as a defeat for Russia and a weakening of its position in the Middle East.
VI. SITUATION IN GEORGIA
- The Belarusian media covered the December mass protests against the results of the parliamentary election in Georgia in the conspiracy style of “color revolutions,” behind which there are “external puppeteers.”
BELARUS
Presidential election
In December 2024, the topic of the upcoming presidential election (January 26, 2025) became the main one in the state media. Unlike the previous elections, there are no alternative candidates in this one, and those that exist are fully loyal to the authorities. Nevertheless, remembering the events of 2020, the Belarusian leadership fears civic protests and, in general, any development of events “not according to the scenario.” It is obvious that the efforts of the ideological department of the Administration of the “president” are aimed at ensuring the appearance of general support for Lukashenka.
Lidziya Yarmoshyna, member of the Central Election Commission of Belarus:
“I just urge everyone to go to the polling stations. Because a lot of people say, ‘What’s the point? Elections are predictable.’ Yes, predictable. But if only you knew how important it is for our President to show on the international stage – especially to such a global player as China – that a huge percentage of the country’s population voted for him.” (Cited from: Nasha Niva, December 15)
Kiryl Kazakou, Minsk-Novosti agency:
“Those Belarusians who have experienced 2020 really want the return of the ‘elections are a holiday’ format. The brain doesn’t want to be stressed, which is what the fugitives have considered the main fuel of protests for the last 30 years.” (Minsk-Novosti, December 13)
A new trend: propaganda is trying to take over the word “dictatorship” from the opposition in relation to the political regime, but use it in a positive connotation. It is important to distinguish different “dictatorships” from each other, propagandists say. In Belarus, it is a “good” one. Lidziya Yarmoshyna made her call to vote for Lukashenka at the pre-election propaganda event called “DICTAT?URA!” [‘Dictate? Hooray! – ed.]
Ihar Tur, ONT TV presenter, speaking at the pre-election “Unity Marathon” on December 14:
“We indeed have a dictatorship of order, justice and kindness. Sometimes those people who refuse to be kind and just and law-abiding need to be pushed a little bit toward that. That’s perfectly normal.”
Also Tur:
“Evil, whether in dictatorship or democracy, is when scoundrels are in power. And whether they are democratic, authoritarian, dictatorial, monarchical or anarchist is the form, not the content. Our “dictator” (actually – no, we have an authoritarian regime) is a good one. Therefore our dictatorship is good, not any dictatorship.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 17)
Siarhei Klishevich, member of the House of Representatives:
“What we need today is a dictatorship of stability. This is what we really need today, in this turbulent sea. […] And this is what our National Leader, Aliaksandr Ryhoravich Lukashenka, can provide.” (Azaryonok. Napriamuyu, December 16)
Ryhor Azaronak, STV TV presenter, propagandist:
“Start, for example, an anti-Russian course – and the West will recognize you. Then even if you eat people in the streets, no one will call you a dictator. No, he [Lukashenka] does not deviate from his course and does not follow the Westerners’ lead. […] And I have only one question to the President: Aliaksandr Ryhoravich, who should I kill, what are my functions?” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 3).
Aliaksandr Shpakouski, pro-government commentator, Minister Counselor at the Embassy of Belarus in Moscow:
“Preservation of Belarus in the orbit of the native East Slavic civilization, and often not thanks to, but in spite of, is one of the main historical merits of A. Lukashenka as the leader of the Russian world of the late 20th-first third of the 21st century.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 10)
25th anniversary of the “Union State”
The Lukashenka regime sees protection from instability in the pre-election period in close cooperation with Russia. Propagandists feel it as well, and as the election is coming, they are calling more and more loudly for Belarus and Russia to stick even more closely to each other.
On December 8, the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the “Union State of Russia and Belarus” was celebrated. On this day in 1999, the treaty on the establishment of the Union State was signed and the Program of Action of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus on implementation of its provisions was adopted. Another anniversary gave an occasion for new enthusiastic statements about “friendship forever.”
Iryna Dauhala, member of the House of Representatives:
“A quarter of a century together. The Union State is a model of real consolidation, friendship and development. […] The Union State does not threaten anyone with anything. The presidents of Belarus and Russia just want to ensure security for their citizens, for all of us together and each of us individually.” (BelTA, December 8)
Aliaksei Dzermant, pro-government “philosopher”:
“The fact that we have this Union and it is developing is a miracle, because it appeared in spite of all external and internal destructive trends. […] Belarus is important for Russia not only from a geostrategic and technological point of view, but also as a kind of training ground where important decisions for the whole of our Russian-Eurasian civilization are worked out.” (personal Telegram channel, December 8)
Ryhor Azaronak, STV TV presenter:
“We started building this very Union State in 1994. Aliaksandr Lukashenka came to power on the idea of reviving a united Fatherland. He broke the line that led us down the Ukrainian path.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 7)
Viktar Azaronak, member of the House of Representatives:
“The Union State is an alternative integration model to Western ones, based on the principles of equality, equity and mutual respect of partner states.” (BelTA, December 8)
Statements on independence from Russia
Along with assurances of fraternal friendship with Russia, Lukashenka gently but regularly reminds himself and the world that Belarus is still an independent state separate from Russia. The Belarusian ruler angrily rejects any hint of dependence on Russia. In December, during a trip to Barysau, he once again brought up the subject and said that “occupation of Belarus by Russia” is impossible as long as he leads the country:
“A lot of people are screaming, ‘Russia has occupied here.’ Look, not with me. No one has occupied anyone here. I thank them for helping us.”
“We have one Fatherland. We have nothing to divide here from Brest to Vladivostok. Russians, Belarusians, this is our common Fatherland. Common, but two states. Well, it so happens that today we have an independent state. Not Russia.” (Pul Pervogo Telegram channel of Lukashenka’s press service, December 10)
And here is another similar statement by Lukashenka about the “union” of Russia and Belarus, probably copied from the famous “Two countries – one state” formula of coexistence of Israel and the State of Palestine:
“A unique world experience has been created: ‘two countries – two economies – one economic space.’ This experience is time-tested and has proved its viability.” (BelTA, December 6)
Following Lukashenka, this motive was echoed by the pro-government propaganda.
Aliaksandr Shpakouski, as usual, blamed opposition Russians for the talks about Belarus’ lack of independence:
“In fact, all this nonsense about “absorption,” “Belarusian province” was cultivated at the West’s behest by Russian “liberals,” traitors, to provoke a conflict between Moscow and Minsk and disrupt the integration of Belarus and Russia, in which Washington saw the ghost of the hard-defeated Soviet Union.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 10)
A new security treaty with Russia and new threats to the West
On December 6, Putin and Lukashenka signed a treaty on security guarantees between Russia and Belarus and approved the Security Concept of the “Union State.” The document defines, in particular, mutual obligations on the defense of the Union State.
Aliaksandr Lukashenka defined the mechanism of the agreement as follows:
“My condition to Putin was one: ‘We in Belarus will determine the targets, not Russians. But you will help us exploit them.’ That is, we will press the button together, God forbid, if it is necessary. But we will determine the goals. He agreed.” (During a working visit to Barysau, BelTA, December 10).
State Secretary of the Security Council of Belarus Aliaksandr Valfovich, commenting on the signing of the new treaty, said that “each president” – both Aliaksandr Lukashenka and Putin – has his own “red button” and “nuclear suitcase.” When journalists asked whether it would be necessary to press the second button “so that the first one works,” he replied:
“It’s up to the two presidents to agree. We are brothers. We have common national interests in terms of the Union State, common tasks.” (BelTA, December 6)
The propaganda of both countries enthusiastically praised the new treaty. The excitement increased even more after Putin promised to share Oreshnik missiles with Belarus after the signing ceremony. The world learned about the Oreshnik medium-range ballistic missile on November 20, 2024, when Russia committed another war crime by striking the Ukrainian city of Dnipro with it.
Aliaksei Dzermant:
“Only the closest person, not even an ally, but a brother, a blood brother, can ask for such a weapon [Oreshnik].” (Azaryonok. Napriamuyu, STV TV channel, December 13)
He is echoed by pro-government “political scientist” Vadzim Yalfimau:
“… Targets and flight tasks for Russian missiles and warheads will be determined by the Belarusian military-political leadership! I would like to emphasize: this is the highest degree of trust! Such a thing does not exist anywhere, especially in NATO. […] Belarus is becoming an important global player.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 12)
Propagandists say that Belarus needs Russian missiles, including nuclear ones, to suppress any attempts of influence from the outside forever.
Kseniya Lebiadzeva, ATN special correspondent:
“I am certain that we will stand a truly impregnable fortress forever. We have a ‘red button,’ there will be Oreshnik as well. Let everyone sleep in peace.” (ATN, December 6)
Andrei Lazutkin, “political scientist”:
“And when they [Western countries] cannot estimate the limit of nuclear weapons use, they will be less, let’s say, aggressive in their foreign policy.” (Azaryonok. Napriamuyu, December 6)
And finally, “nuclear bravado” from the main propagandist and the master of the “red button” at the same time:
“A powerful weapon. We need to defend ourselves. We would never have built it from scratch to a missile. It’s a huge amount of money, it’s technology. It’s many, many generations. That’s why such a question was raised, and thanks to Vladimir Vladimirovich – he reacted to it, said yes.” (Lukashenka during a working visit to Barysau, website of the “president” of Belarus, December 10).
“I brought nuclear warheads here. More than a dozen of them. Many people write, ‘Ah, it’s a joke, nobody brought anything.’ We did. And the fact that they [opponents] say it’s a joke means they missed it. They didn’t even notice how we brought them here.” (During a working visit to Barysau, BelTA, December 10).
BELARUS’ DEMOCRATIC FORCES
The Lukashenka regime sees the democratic movement as its main threat. In December, as the presidential election was coming, the attention of propaganda towards supporters of democratic transit increased. Propagandist Yury Tserakh openly threatens supporters of the protests with reprisals if they take to the streets:
“Zmahars [protesters], you cannot understand the most important thing… We too are yearning, we too are catching the same vibe of the twentieth [2020]. We want to go back to the battle as well, to feel those emotions, those sensations again. To feel the crunch of the rebel’s spine breaking under our knee, to remember how numb the toes in the forged boot, with which the rebel was hammered into the wet fall soil. To feel the vibrations running through our bones from the sledgehammer we used to crush those who threatened our loved ones, who promised to kill us, who carried out terrorist attacks. To hear the engine of that very roller of repression, which we rolled you all into the asphalt with, starting up with the pungent smell of burnt diesel fuel. We miss it all, too.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 1)
Belarusian officials scare the society with the threat of “external forces.” According to them, the nearest neighbors create Belarusian military units out of Belarusian political emigrants in order to invade and seize power in the country. Valery Revenka, Assistant Minister of Defense for International Military Cooperation:
“The intensity of NATO’s activity doesn’t change. What is changing are threats. Threats first of all from a number of our neighbors, who create illegal armed formations, including those citizens of the Republic of Belarus who left our state for various reasons.” (In an interview with BelTA, December 8)
In December, another group of five political prisoners was released from Belarusian prisons. Apparently, one of the conditions of release was to show repentance videos of each of the pardoned on propaganda channels, where they say that some “extremist organizations in the European Union” (meaning Belarusian human rights activists and political emigrants) allegedly used their personal data to recognize them as political prisoners. The released demonstrated the complaints prepared on this occasion to the courts of the EU, Lithuania and Poland, the European Court of Human Rights, “European prosecutor’s office.”
Ruslan Charnietski, the newly appointed Minister of Culture of Belarus, publicly, from the TV screen, “gave a chance” to the artists who supported the protests in 2020 and called on them to repent and return to the cultural life of the country:
“Every person, every worker is valuable to us. If this person … sincerely realized that yes, he/she was wrong, it means that some actions should be taken to show this sincerity. […] Just saying it is not enough, you need to prove by actions that you are ready to develop our country together with the Belarusian people.” (Azaryonok. Napriamuyu, STV TV channel, December 3)
In another program, Charnietski even admitted the possibility to forgive the “confused” artists, but only if they are ready to “openly show support to the state, to the power that we have now.” (SkazhiNieMolchi, Belarus 1 TV channel, December 20)
But such statements are rather the exception. The goal of the propaganda remains unchanged – to discredit, intimidate and divide the democratic movement despite the fact that almost all of its participants are either in prison or have been expelled from the country. The main thing is to show that the suppression of the 2020 protests and the repression that followed was not in vain.
Ryhor Azaronak, TV presenter of STV TV channel:
“How did our land ever carry them? How did they eat our bread? The Zmahars continue to persist in their Nazism. They are dead men themselves. And if there is even a drop of tolerance towards them, if someone somewhere thinks, ‘So what, they have such views’ – then we are worthless as a nation.” (STV TV channel. Cited from: personal Telegram channel, December 4).
UKRAINE
One of the main tasks of anti-Ukrainian propaganda since the beginning of the full-scale invasion is to present not Ukraine but Russia as a “victim” of external aggression and to convince the audience that Russia is not attacking and occupying, but defending and liberating in this war. It is in the context of this narrative that propaganda justifies and endorses Russian missile attacks on peaceful cities and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. The discussion of the strike by the Oreshnik ballistic missile on the city of Dnipro on November 20, 2024 took place in the same paradigm.
Siarhei Mikhovich:
“It is important that Russia launched this strike precisely for defensive purposes, after the U.S. and its European allies allowed the Ukrainian armed forces to strike the territory in Kursk and Bryansk regions.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 2)
According to Mikhovich, this “hitherto secret weapon became another reliable shield” for the security of Russia and Belarus.
In general, the hostile tone towards Ukraine remains in the Belarusian mass media. Propagandists, following their Russian colleagues, advocate the deprivation of Ukraine’s subjectivity, gloat about Russian attacks on peaceful cities and civilian infrastructure. At the same time, Lukashenka’s propaganda rejects accusations of complicity in the aggression and calls for peace talks, to which, in their opinion, Belarus must necessarily be a party.
Vadzim Yelfimau, pro-government “political scientist”:
“It should be made so that the entire territory of Ukraine, within whatever borders, but all of it, whatever remains! – would be friendly to Russia and Belarus. Not neutral, but friendly. […] Therefore, we have a vested interest in complete denazification and demilitarization of our southern neighbors. Complete means taking into account the interests of Belarus. So we should become participants in future negotiations.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 5).
Ihar Tur, ONT TV presenter:
“Since 2014, Aliaksandr Lukashenka has been repeating that he does not like the very institution of mediation, does not want to be a mediator and is not eager to be in them, but is ready to become one between Russia and Ukraine in order to save the lives of Slavs.” (Propaganda, ONT TV channel, December 9)
Yury Ambrazevich, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus:
“Belarus is more interested than anyone else in a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine, because the situation on its southern borders is very complicated. And against this background, the accusations of our country of complicity in aggression look absurd.” (BelTA, December 16)
Another popular line of thought is that Ukraine is a puppet of the West, fulfilling the whims of its American or European masters, and that Ukraine’s leadership is not independent in its decisions.
Aliaksandr Tsishchanka, pro-government “expert”:
“Today’s Ukraine, with its position, is a purely American project, and not at all some Zelenskyy, whose role was initially defined no higher than a bibabo, a simple glove puppet.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 6)
Andrei Bahadzel, officer of the General Staff of the Belarusian Armed Forces:
“If we talk about Zelenskyy, it is obvious that he is non-subjective in many aspects, even within his own state we can only talk about collective Zelenskyy. The fact that he is traveling, talking about something, he is expressing not so much his own point of view, but the point of view of those elites, which today are leading somewhere in the West.” (BelTA, December 11)
Aliaksandr Alesin, pro-government “expert”:
“The Ukrainian card has already been beaten, but Trump will play it to the last, squeezing concessions out of Russia.” (BelTA, December 11)
Another propaganda claim: Ukraine’s territory, subsoil and economy have long been divided by “Western corporations.”
Lyudmila Hladkaya, propagandist of SB. Belarus Segodnya:
“Whose Ukraine? A bit of math. According to research by Western institutions, 40% of Ukraine’s arable land is now under the control of large American corporations, 28% is controlled by France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, American agroholdings and Ukrainian oligarchs, 9% by China, and 23% by some others. That is, three quarters of the country does not belong to Ukrainians. And the ultimate beneficiary is the U.S.” (Moscow-Minsk. Cited from: personal Telegram channel, December 12).
Aliaksandr Tsishchanka, “military expert”:
“The EU is ready to endlessly supply arms there and even deploy its pseudo-peacekeepers already, because what is at stake is not Ukraine with its Ukrainians, but mercantile interests tied to property. […] Russia’s victory promises only the nullification of their plundering deals with the Kyiv puppet regime.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 18)
Children of Ukraine
Belarus and Russia continue to illegally deport Ukrainian children to their territory. Propaganda tries to justify the regime’s actions by saying that children from the combat zone are allegedly undergoing rehabilitation in Belarus. Human rights activists have repeatedly noted that Ukrainian children taken to Belarus are subject to ideological manipulation aimed at “washing out” the Ukrainian identity, re-education and militarization of consciousness.[1]
On December 3, another group of children from eastern Ukraine arrived in Belarus for “treatment in a sanatorium.” Propagandist and member of the House of Representatives (“parliament” of Belarus) Vadzim Hihin commented on the news as follows:
“The most important thing is to help the children of Donbas. No matter how hard the enemy tries to prevent it, no matter what nefarious tricks they try to use, we have done and will continue to do this work.”
THE “COLLECTIVE WEST”
As before, the anti-Western rhetoric of the Belarusian mass media is characterized by an aggressively bellicose tone. On the other hand, regular signals of the Belarusian leadership to the Western neighbors about readiness for negotiations, about the fact that “the door is not closed” and that it is always possible to return to “business as usual” are received through the mass media. In this, by the way, there is a significant difference between Belarusian and Russian propaganda. The latter has long ago “closed all the doors” and is waging an informational war “to destroy” the West.
An example of a statement in which the usual accusations against the West are followed by “conciliatory” signals can be the official comment of Anatol Hlaz, spokesperson for the Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on the change of government in Lithuania after the parliamentary election (October 2024). First, Glaz says that he sees nothing good in the election results because “anti-Belarusian and anti-Russian narratives were imposed on the program from the outside.” The official then emphasizes that Minsk is ready to respond positively to Vilnius’ constructive steps because Belarusians have “absolutely normal relations with Lithuanians themselves.” (Interview with the Russian TASS agency. Cited from: website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Belarus, December 12).
Ahead of the presidential election in Belarus, propaganda is widely using the old narrative about Western “interference.”
Ihar Karpenka, head of the Central Election Commission of Belarus:
“Western elites impose their own political and social dogmas, some universal democratic standards of state structure on the public. They use election campaigns as a tool to destabilize the state. In this regard, a search for new forms and ways of confronting the global West is required.” (BelTA, December 4)
On December 18, Ivan Eismant, chairman of the National State TV and Radio Company – the main information broadcaster of the country – in an interview to BelTA agency expressed an opinion that Belarusian mass media “adequately withstand the attack” of the West:
“Certainly, the state media has changed dramatically recently. […] We have quickly reorganized, I think we are holding the blow with dignity. […] Our former Western partners allocate huge money allegedly for the development of democracy in Belarus, in reality – for the fight against state power in our country.”
Poland and Lithuania
Belarus’ closest Western neighbors remain the main targets of anti-Western propaganda attacks. In his speeches, Lukashenka often uses the myth about the alleged desire of Poland and Lithuania to destroy / divide / conquer Belarus. The popularization of this myth pursues an important goal – to consolidate the society around the “president” as much as possible in the face of “external threats”:
“God forbid we wouldn’t have made it in 2020, everyone would be here by now. Both NATO and the Americans behind their backs. And they would push the Poles – the Poles have their own interests – they need to seize western Belarus, as they once did.” (During a working trip to Barysau, official website of the “president,” December 10).
Also Lukashenka:
“Poland spends huge resources on arming its army. If they want to live in peace with us, as they claim, then why spend billions of dollars on armament? […] And this is already a threat to our joint group.” (BelTA, December 6)
On December 12, at the conference on the anniversary of the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide, Belarusian Defense Minister Viktar Khrenin once again accused Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic states of “Nazism and fascism”:
“At the forefront of this reckless policy is the leadership of Poland, the Baltic states and Ukraine. […] It is obvious that the plague of Nazism has not only come close to our borders, but has spread like a malignant tumor to many Western countries.”
Aliaksandr Valfovich, State Secretary of the Security Council of Belarus:
“It’s not Belarus and Russia that provoke the West, but the West provokes Belarus and Russia, as well as the Union State as a whole, with its actions.” (BelTA, December 6)
Spy films
At the beginning of December, the Belarus 1 state TV channel showed a film titled “Counterintelligence of the KGB of Belarus against the special services of Poland: agents and traitors.” It was about two Polish prisoners of Belarusian prison – Tomasz Bieroza and Jerzy Żywalewski. Both of them lived for some time in Belarus, were arrested by the KGB on charges of espionage and agent activity and sentenced to long prison terms. The film is full of anti-Polish cliches and accusations against the Polish government of subversion against Belarus.
Vadzim Hihin, a member of the House of Representatives and a well-known TV propagandist, highly appreciated this video product:
“Such informational and propaganda work is no less important than direct operational and investigative work. […] By publicizing the results of counterintelligence activities, our KGB strikes another blow against the enemy.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 4)
On December 10, the same Belarus 1 channel aired another “spy film” about Poland. This time it told about the failure of Polish spies, who allegedly tried to recruit a Belarusian diplomat.
Andrei Lazutkin, a pro-government “political scientist,” believes that Polish security services are “sad now” because “there are no even remotely similar movies about ‘Belarusian spies’ in the Polish media. (Minskaya Prauda, December 4).
SITUATION IN SYRIA
Propagandists were unanimous in their negative perception of the overthrow of dictator Bashar al-Assad in Syria and the coming of the opposition to power in the first half of December 2024. Most of them viewed these events as a geopolitical defeat for Russia. Learning lessons for themselves was a logical and inevitable step. The main conclusion is that Belarus needs a strong army and special services to make sure that something like this never happens.
Vadzim Hihin:
“Assad is done. Russia will now accomplish its tasks in Syria without him. Difficult, but not impossible…. Assad’s fall is a strong blow for Russia.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 8)
Kseniya Lebiadzeva, columnist of the Belarus 1 TV channel:
“This is a good example of the West’s techniques: divide and conquer. And for us it is a memo: any power must be strong, otherwise there will be no state.” (Belarus 1 TV channel, December 10)
Aliaksandr Shpakouski, pro-government “expert”:
“The bitter experience of the Syrian mistakes must be taken into account by any state seeking to pursue a sovereign course. […] We need to rely on our own motivated army, special services, law enforcement bloc and state apparatus, where there should be a constant struggle for purity of ranks.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 12)
Lukashenka spoke publicly about the situation in Syria for the first time only three days after the opposition’s victory. He also considers the incident a conspiracy of “external forces”:
“… There is a struggle of the world’s main players in Syria. The Americans, the European Union, the Turks there – regional, the Russians are involved and so on. These squabbles began at one time, and this is how it ended. This is a lesson for us. We have to determine our own fate. We must save our country!” (Official website of the “president,” December 10)
He also denied the accusations against Bashar al-Assad:
“How is Bashar al-Assad a dictator? A doctor by profession, I have known him for a long time. We had good friendly relations. He is not a dictator. He treated people as a doctor. He never killed anyone.” (BelTA, December 10)
SITUATION IN GEORGIA
At the end of October 2024, the pro-Russian Georgian Dream party won the parliamentary election in Georgia. The opposition and the country’s President Salome Zurabishvili personally declared the election results rigged and called on citizens to take to the streets. Mass protests and confrontations with the police that started after that did not stop for almost two months. Russian and Belarusian propaganda as usual called the protests in Georgia an attempted coup led by foreign “puppeteers” and compared them to the Ukrainian “Revolution of Dignity” in 2014 and the protests in Belarus after the 2020 presidential election.
Anton Papou, columnist of the SB. Belarus Segodnya newspaper:
“In an attempt to overthrow the legitimate authorities in Tbilisi, the West uses the same arsenal it previously used in Belarus and other countries that were subject to hybrid attack.
[…] The West is following familiar patterns, trying to repeat the scenario of the Ukrainian Maidan. Just as in Kyiv 11 years ago, numerous NGOs have brought hundreds of radicals to the streets, who cover themselves with crowds of fooled youth.” (SB. Belarus Segodnya, December 3)
Yury Uvarau (Minskaya Prauda):
“Georgian marginals under the leadership of the still acting president Salome Zurabishvili and their Western masters, having realized that they are finally losing the political battle, decided to apply the Ukrainian scenario.” (Minskaya Prauda, December 3)
Aleh Haidukevich, “political scientist”:
“Looking at the events in Georgia, you realize that history goes in circles. All color revolutions are organized in the same way and there are always those who fall for the same technologies.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 1)
Yury Tserakh, commentator:
“The Georgian rebellion seems to have followed ours. […] Well, the manual is the same, that’s why everything turns out the same.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 4)
Kiryl Kazakou, “expert”:
“Look at Georgia. […] You can remove the inscription “Georgia, 2024” under the photos and instead insert “Belarus, 2020.” The curators of our enemies, and they have them, and the masters of the independent press turned out to be the same.” (Minsk-Novosti, December 6)
Aliaksei Dzermant:
“Georgia, of course, has a special role for the Eurasian space from a symbolic point of view. The land that gave birth to Stalin belongs to Eurasia.” (Personal Telegram channel, December 1)
iSANS will continue to analyze main propaganda trends in Belarus and Russia in 2025