dw.com
287 Belarusian Firms Produce Weapons for Russia: Tsikhanouskaya
Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya reported to the Council of Europe that at least 287 Belarusian companies are producing weapons for Russia, initiated by Lukashenko's regime for economic reasons and to secure its alliance with Russia, with investments of around $1.5 billion and plans to increase production significantly by 2028.
- How did Belarusian President Lukashenko's regime initiate and benefit from this increased military production?
- BelPol's investigation reveals that Belarusian President Lukashenko initiated this military production, driven by economic interests and to maintain his alliance with Russia. This initiative involves state-owned enterprises and hundreds of commercial entities, expanding upon the 99 companies previously known to supply Russia with weapon components.
- What are the long-term implications of Belarus's expanding weapons manufacturing capacity for regional stability and international relations?
- Belarus is rapidly developing its weapons manufacturing capabilities, aiming for full localization by 2027-2028. This includes producing various munitions, drones (some tested in Ukraine), and components, with assistance and equipment sourced from countries like China, and microelectronics from East Asia and the US. This trajectory suggests preparation for future conflicts beyond the current war in Ukraine.
- What is the scale of Belarusian involvement in supplying weapons to Russia, and what are the immediate economic and geopolitical consequences?
- At least 287 Belarusian enterprises are producing weapons for Russia, according to a report by BelPol, an organization of former Belarusian security officials, presented to the Council of Europe by Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya. Russia has invested around $1.5 billion in the Belarusian economy since the start of the full-scale war in Ukraine, with some funds directed towards weapon production.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing strongly emphasizes the negative aspects of Belarus's weapon production, highlighting the numbers of factories involved and the potential for future conflicts. The use of phrases like "autocratic regimes" and "war in the center of Europe" contributes to a negative portrayal of Belarus's actions and Lukashenko's regime. While the information presented might be factually accurate, the choice of words and emphasis guides the reader towards a critical interpretation.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language such as "autocratic regimes," "dictator," and "war in the center of Europe." These terms carry negative connotations and shape the reader's perception of Belarus and its actions. More neutral alternatives could include "authoritarian government," "president," and "conflict in Europe." The repeated emphasis on the negative consequences of Belarus's actions also contributes to a biased tone.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the Belarusian involvement in supplying weapons to Russia, but omits discussion of potential consequences for Belarus from continued involvement. It also lacks analysis of the international community's response beyond mentioning Svetlana Tikhanovskaya's report to the Council of Europe. There is no mention of sanctions or other international pressure on Belarus, nor the potential economic impact on Belarus from sanctions. While acknowledging space constraints is valid, these omissions limit the reader's ability to fully understand the geopolitical implications of the situation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic view of Belarus's motivations, portraying them primarily as economically driven or a means for Lukashenko to maintain power. More nuanced explanations for Belarus's actions, such as geopolitical considerations or ideological alignment with Russia, are largely absent. This limits the reader's understanding of the complex factors driving Belarus's involvement.
Gender Bias
The article primarily focuses on male figures, such as Lukashenko, Putin, and Vladimir Zhigar, while Svetlana Tikhanovskaya is mentioned as the source of information. While this doesn't inherently indicate gender bias, it reflects a typical focus on male political leaders in international affairs. The lack of female voices beyond Tikhanovskaya limits a more balanced perspective on the impact of the situation on Belarusian women.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights Belarus's involvement in producing weapons for Russia, used in the war in Ukraine. This fuels the conflict, undermines regional peace and security, and violates international norms against supplying arms to belligerent states. The Belarusian regime uses the threat of war to justify repression and maintain power. This directly undermines peaceful and inclusive societies, and strong institutions.