The NAM lawyer Artsiom Proskalovich hosted a discussion with Ekaterina Deikalo on Svaboda Premium on the topic "Aggressor — Belarus or Lukashenko?"
Following the principles developed in international law over the past decades makes it difficult to respond to the current challenges and threats the world is facing. There is a lot of talk now about hybrid warfare, hybrid propaganda, we can also talk about the hybrid occupation of Belarus. Lukashenko is acting either in agreement with Russia or under coercion. The Kremlin allowed him to repress the Belarusians, but deprived him of powers in the military sphere — it is in line with the concept of occupation.
This is a non-military occupation. Today the civil administration in Belarus is acting solely in the interests of the occupying country and to the detriment of national interests. Democratic forces promote the thesis about the occupied country, so that the Belarusian people are not responsible for the actions of the Lukashenko regime. Belarus was occupied before it became an accomplice to aggression, therefore all claims should be made against Lukashenko and his administration, appointed by the occupying country.
The status of Belarus as an occupied country would prevent discrimination against Belarusians living abroad, as well as guarantee the same level of sanctions against the Belarusian regime as against the Russian one, which would eliminate loopholes through which Russia could circumvent them. It would also give grounds to demand that the Kremlin withdraw its occupation troops from the territory of Belarus, rather than engage in pointless dialogue with Lukashenko.
Discuss in social networks:
Facebook | Instagram | Telegram | Twitter