The Last Soviet Republic: Alexander Lukashenko's Belarus

Stewart Parker does not have the typical academic credentials attached to his name, but don't let that dissuade you from reading The Last Soviet Republic. This is a wonderful account of modern Belarus that provides a thorough history and a litany of citations for interested parties to review. One will come away from Parker's book with a much better understanding of the context that produced Belarus as an oddity in modern society - the last country in Eastern Europe that still has most of the structures and practices of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact countries. This alone makes Belarus a pariah to the NATO countries in Western Europe (and the United States), but it also explains why Alexsandr Lukashenko is so wildly popular with the people of Belarus, who continue to enjoy free health care, guaranteed employment, and free education, among other socialist benefits.Rest assured, you will not find a better book covering modern Belarus. Almost all of the books in Amazon's recommended readings about Belarus fall back on stale stereotypes of Lukashenko as "Europe's last dictator," the phrase used by former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The authors may have more prestigious credentials next to their name, but these books have none of the original analysis offered in Parker's book.At some point, a more authoritative account of Belarussian history will need to be written. Parker's book is relatively short and deals more with modern Belarus than the past. However, this is the best introduction that a casual reader can get on this fascinating country that resisted the wave of counter-revolutions experienced across Eastern Europe in the 1990s.

This book cuts through the anti-Lukashenko propaganda which is all the rage in the west these days. Taking into consideration the economic damage that has been caused by the true believers of western-style laissez faire capitalism, how can the world still believe that Lukashenko's policies are "evil?"This man has been demonized and deserves a fair assessment.

Anyone who desires to learn the truth about President Alexander Lukashenko and Belarus should read this work. The author, Stewart Parker, has no "axe to grind" and presents his material in an objective and unpretentious manner. Parker's narrative is very readable and he covers his subject matter with a flowing style that helps the reader glide from chapter to chapter.I found his "matter of fact" approach, backed up by source information, to be quite enjoyable. Parker doesn't "beat you over the head." While the author does not openly side with Communism, his objective and logical presentation backed by his research puts the October Revolution, industrialization, collectivization, etc. in a more realistic and positive light than the stereotypical image presented by most western political hacks that masquerade as writers.Parker's coverage of President Lukashenko and the situation in Belarus after the dissolution of the Soviet Union is detailed and accurate. He reports on this in the main part of the book with the same objectivity, logic, and use of source materials as he does in the first one quarter of the book that is devoted to the country's history. His coverage of Belarus' social and economic systems, human rights policies, international relations, etc. is meticulous and very well presented. The sections that expose and lay bare the United States' hypocrisy and double standards regarding Belarus are worth the price of the book!I believe this is an excellent book and is MUST reading for anyone who desires to learn the truth about President Lukashenko and Belarus. It is certainly the most objective book that I've read on Belarus and Soviet history by a western author.

In chapter 1-7 of this book, Parker gives a quite decent introduction to the history of Belarus, before and under the Soviet Union. Parker gives delivers a good analysis of Balrus' gains from the Soviet Union, how the corruption that crushed the Soviet economy during the Brezhnev years, was not as appearant in Belarus as in Russia and Ukraine and why Belarus have had a substantially better econnomic performance in the years following after the collapse of the Soviet Union than Ukraine and Russia.One weekness of Parkers book is that he fails to explain why Belarus have had a better economic development than Russia and Ukraine and even quite decent compared with all the former Soviet Rebublics. As Verena Fritz shows in "State-building" (highly recommended), the former Soviet Republics with a stable consolidated political regime - either democtratic or authoritan (Belarus could probably best be described as a democratorship in this respect) - have performed much better than those left in political chaos (as Russia and Ukraine), War (As Tadjikistan and Armenia) or both (as Moldova and Georgia).A more serious weekness of Parker's book is that the book contains a lot of examples of errors in the specter between inaccuracies and share disinformation.One example is Parkers coverage of the Karapaty mass-graves outside Minsk where the best scientific estimates suggests that 220.000-250.000 dead bodies are burried after being shot by the NKVD during the 1930s purges. Parker suggests the number is 30.000 and that it is not known whether the bodies was killed by the NKVD or the Germans during the war. Though the number of killed is disputed, it is an undisputable scientific fact that the murdered are vicums ot the NKVD purges. As the archeologist Zianon Pazniak and engineer Auhien Smyhalou who were responsible for the archeological project when the mass grave was first found in 1988 have documented in their report, we know that they are killed by the NKVD because of the ammonuition used, coins found on the victims that are no newer than from 1936 and other sources documenting that the mass graves was used by the NKVD from 1937-1940 and that the Germans did not invade the area before 1941. Instead of this scientific material Parker base his disinforamtion on revisionist rethorics a la "can you be really, really sure" supported by the Lukashenka administration.Another example of disinoformation is the disappearance of the oppositional politician Victor Gonchar and his friend Anatoly Krasovsky, who dissappeared from Minsk the 16th of September 1999. Parker argue that it is unlikely that they were murdered because another person missing, Zakharenko, later turned out to be alive and living in London. Further that the Lukashenka government on several occations have claimed that they have taken the investigation of the dissappearence very seriously. Third, Parker claims, it would be counterproductive for the authorities to get rid of a political opponent. On the other hand, the murder of the two missing persons is documented on video-tape. The tape recoreded by two oppostional politicians shows how they climb over the fences of a KGB owned area (acting after a tip from a source that later also disappeared) and starts digging in the ground where they were told the bodies were hid until the hit their dead bodies in the ground. In addition to releasing the video-tape to the public, the two persons who recorded it had to flee Belarus and was given political asylum abroad. Aage Storm Borchrevink has interviewed them and let them tell their story in his book "Eurostories" (as far as I know it is only published in Norwegian. Neither the immigration authorities who checked out their stories when they applied for asylum or the Helsinki commitee have been able to find any mismatches in their stories.A third example of Parker's disinformation regards the independent media. According to Parker 555 out of 776 newspapers in Belarus was independent i 2005. I have not checked out theese numbers, but assume that it is true. What Parker does not write is that all the independent newspapers together is printed in 300.000 copies, while the biggest pro-regime newspaper published by the state alone is printed in 500.000 copies. Neither does Parker write anything about that all distribution of newspapers in Belarus is done through state postal system only, charging 4-5 times as much for distribution of independent newspapers as it does for stateowned newspapers. In addition the taxes on independent newspapers is twice as high as for state owned. As there is a tency towards that advertisers in independent newspapers gets surprising visits from the tax police, they often hessitate to advertise in independent newspapers. Information from Reporters without borders and the Helsinki commitee backs up this information.2 examples Parker gives of independent newspapers that has been closed is Nasha Niva and Narodnaya Volia that, accroding to Parker's claims, after several warnings for anti-semittic journalism were closed in 2006 and 2005 respetively. According to Reporters without borders Nasha Niva was closed as a result of their landlord broke off their lease after he was visited by the secret police. In October 2003, former Czech President Václav Havel granted the cash portion of the Hanno R. Ellenbogen Citizenship Award to "Nasha Niva" editor Andrey Dynko. The Award is given each year by the Prague Society for International Cooperation to an individual who has dedicated his or her life to public service with the stipulation that the financial portion of the award be passed to a gifted young person. "I pass this award to Mr. Dynko because we, who have benefited so much from international solidarity, must show solidarity ourselves," Havel said at the award ceremony in Prague. You can think for yourself what version you belive in.I could have given a lot of more examples. I belaive that the ones that I have given is more than enough to demonstrate the pattern in Parkers writing though. Facts tends to be left out of the story. When they are included he uses vague rethorics to make the situation unclear, rather than present the basic facts that will make it clear to the reader. It is hardly relevant in the disappearence over that another missed person, later turned up alive or for the suppression of independent nbewspapers in general that the Lukashenka regime also has closed two anti-semittic newspapers. Neither is it very clearifying to ask rethorical questions like "why should Lukashenka want to do anything like that", instead of giving the reader the available facts so that they can make up their own opinion based on avaialbe information.Parker is right that much of the information about Belarus in international media is not very informative, biased or both. Unfortunately a better source of information is not given in Parkers book.

I am an habitual traveler to eastern Europe and the Balkans, and a history buff too. So getting as documented as I can about the places I am going to visit, is an essential part of my travel planning. And on a place with a history as tumultuous as Europe, that means that getting opinions from both sides of the "front" is basic. Once said that, I have not been to Belarus yet, but I have a reasonable knowledge of the history and politics of the countries that surround it.This book is an unashamed eulogy to Lukashenko and his way of ruling. Belarus is pictured as something like a social welfare Arcadia whose example most countries should follow (just as Cuba an Venezuela are said to be doing already).The very dark sides of his authoritarian rule (some say dictatorial, but I am not going to get into that right now) are downplayed or simply passed over without much attention. The role of the opposition, ridiculed or defined just as USA an EU antisocialist and capitalist interventions in an otherwise close to idyllic place.If you can not read Belarussian or Russian, and you want to spend some money to learn how the Lukashenko PR propaganda sounds... This is a great book to get. I do not agree with, or even believe much of what is said; but I find it interesting, anyway.

What I liked most about this book is how easily readable it is. I was curious to learn more about this very unknown country and leader. This book is full very interesting information about this mysterious Eastern European nation. Still, I took off one star because the author is not neutral in his treatment of President Lukashenko. Learning about his achievements was very interesting, but I would've loved to learn a little more about his flaws (although one can rightfully say that this is pretty much all we hear in Western Media). Nonetheless an excellent book.

This is not a bad book, however I find it bizarre that people would call this 'objective'. The authors' claim that the collectivisation of farms in the Soviet Union was entirely voluntary is an absolute fallacy and he evidently subscribes to the myth that Lithuania is the sole successor state to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania which is simply wrong. Belarus is, if not the sole successor to the Grand Duchy, the main successor and only much later historical events have allowed Vilnius to end up the capital of a Baltic state instead of a Slavic one.With regards to modern politics the book is ultimately an apology for Lukashenko's regime. It rightly points out many of the myths espoused by the West but fails to offer a balanced approach. It never questions Lukashenko's motives and often only uses quotes from Lukashenko as evidence - can a politicians speeches always be taken at face value? The author also fails to hold Lukashenko to account on his abuses of democracy - should a president be allowed to 'appoint' his own members of parliament, however few?The author's marxist views are self evident throughout the book and as an educated member of the British working class I have to say I found it thoroughly offensive that he claims that as a class in the UK we have been defeated instead of incorporated and that the upper and middle classes sneer at us, calling us all'Chavs'. It would be no more accurate to say that the middle classes label everyone in the working classes 'Skinheads'.I would say therefore that this book is useful in understanding how the Belarussians see themselves and have thus awarded it 3 stars, however if you know nothing of the regions history/politics and are looking for a reliable, objective history, look elsewhere.

its ok I will read it again to try to understand more.a little heavy going.................is it a true reflection iam not sure...take from it what you wish

I found this book a refreshing change from the relentless negativeness which charaterises the UK media coverage of Belarus. I bought the book becuase I wanted to know more about Belarus and was impressed with the way Mr Parker put forward a fact based argument to support his view that there are positive aspects to Belarus such as universal, good quality welfare, health and eduction provision. Just to make sure I checked out the references supplied by the author.My interest in Belarus was prompted by medical research which indicated that Belarus was the only country from the ex-USSR and former Eastern Block where the well being of the people had not deteriorated post-1991.My only criticisms of the book was minor: a) the absence of an economic analysis b) the style was a tad repetitive c) the author occasionally meanders off onto issues relating UK politics which is not useful.Defintely worthwhile though and I hope Mr Parker brings out a new edition covering the elections of 19 December 2010