EMBASSY IN BELARUSIAN STATE MEDIA SPOTLIGHT: COVERAGE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 MINSK 000154 SIPDIS SIPDIS SENSITIVE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KPAO OEXC SCUL PREL BO SUBJECT: EMBASSY IN BELARUSIAN STATE MEDIA SPOTLIGHT: COVERAGE PREPOSTEROUS BUT PERSISTENT Summary -------------- ¶1. (SBU) The Belarusian state media landscape remains challenging, with a clear anti-USG and anti-Western agenda. State-owned media outlets, both broadcast and print, have continued their negative and inaccurate reporting about U.S. Embassy activities; post management and Embassy officers -- particularly from POL/ECON and PAS -- have become minor celebrities, featured in state TV broadcasts several times each month. While preposterous, these reports remain persistent, even if state media hacks don't believe what they're saying or writing. Rather than seek to counter every report, we prefer to take the high road and reach out to a broader and younger audience to educate Belarusians about American culture, society and values. End summary. Motivation, Strategy and Desired Results -------------- ¶2. (SBU) State media has the natural motivation of persuading average Belarusians, who have little or no access to alternative sources of information, that the United States, European Union and other Western institutions are engaged in activities that are detrimental to the stability of Belarus. Moreover, at every opportunity, state media outlets will intertwine opposition activities with the USG and Western institutions to create a perception in the mind of viewers and readers that they are one and the same. As for the desired results, these are obvious, but what is not clear is how effective this propaganda campaign is. Anecdotal evidence and some polling data suggest that it reaches their audience and has some lasting effect. On the other hand, this same evidence suggests that many viewers and readers see these reports for what they are; pure propaganda meant to discredit the USG and Western institutions. Unfortunately, it appears that the ability to differentiate between state media fact and fiction wanes as one moves from Minsk and the major cities into the more rural parts of the country. So You Want to Be in Pictures? Bid on Minsk! -------------- ¶3. (SBU) Media scrutiny has become so persistent that Embassy Minsk management is tempted to replace standard bidding practices with a screen test. The Ambassador, DCM, POL/ECON and PAS officers, USAID officer, DATT, and other Embassy employees inevitably attract state TV cameras and "journalists" when traveling outside Minsk, and often when in the capital itself. This is most insidious in rural areas, where "local" journalists -- clearly dispatched by the Belarusian KGB -- appear spontaneously at private meetings. The following paragraphs detail some recent examples of media interest in mission personnel. The Marshall Center: A Spy Factory? -------------- ¶4. (U) Belarusian state television aired an hour-long "expose" on December 9, 2006 entitled "Documentary Detective: Secrets of Garmisch" in which outlandish claims were made about the Marshall Center. "The Marshall Center for Security Studies located in Garmisch, Germany was created specifically to solicit secret intelligence information from the military experts from the former Soviet Union countries," reads the voiceover from this absurd report. The author of the report concludes the expose by stating "the Center has been and continues to be one of the primary intelligence-gathering tools directed against the former Soviet countries." Footage included grainy views of the DATT at a MOD-organized visit to a truck factory, and interviews with numerous active duty and retired Belarusian military officers who attended the Marshall Center. One of the retirees claimed that the DATT (then a Foreign Area Officer trainee) had kept him under observation while sponsoring him during a course in 1997. Opposition is Equated with USG and West -------------- ¶5. (U) Belarusian media generally portray the opposition together with the U.S. Embassy to foster the state propaganda that the opposition would not exist without Embassy support. For example, on January 7, State television aired a 15-minute report on Embassy activities over the past several months leading up the January 14 local elections. According to the author of this segment, "With the coming of Ambassador Stewart in September, the principles of the diplomatic mission's work here remained unchanged, though the political context was revised. While the opposition was considering its participation in the elections, the diplomats began schooling it for the campaign. After a brief familiarization tour, they [U.S. diplomats] held meetings with representatives of the Belarusian Popular Front, communists and social democrats. Journalists were not allowed to attend the meeting. Now well-versed in business trips, they [the U.S. diplomats] paid a visit to the representatives MINSK 00000154 002 OF 002 of local opposition groups. They were not received very warmly, accused of having come empty-handed." The report included cameras shots from various angles of Embassy staff in separate meetings with opposition figures. Election Monitoring - A Foregone Conclusion -------------- ¶6. (U) On January 21, Belarusian state TV aired a 17-minute report focusing on the local elections and the U.S. Embassy's "involvement" in the campaign period and election monitoring. According to the report, "Experience shows that Embassy officers are only interested in the information they would like to hear." Moreover, the report concluded by saying that "U.S. diplomats are aware of the true rating of the Belarusian opposition. Knowing in advance that their pet would lose the elections, the Embassy acted preemptively and declared the elections undemocratic. And as can be concluded from the remarks of Deputy Chief of Mission Jonathan Moore, the very course of the elections was of no interest to the Embassy as the statement about its undemocratic nature was ready as early as in summer." Footage in this case included shots of the DCM meeting democratic opposition leader Aleksandr Milinkevich at the front door of his apartment. Laughable, Yet Serious; It's Not Personal, It's Just Business -------------- -------------- ¶7. (SBU) State media "professionals" are generally Belarusians simply trying to make ends meet. Anecdotal evidence indicates that most do not believe what they write or say, but it is clear that they are compensated relatively well for their handiwork. For example, one correspondent who contributes to state print media outlets confided to an Embassy staff member that he was envious that he (the staff member) had studied in the U.S. on an academic exchange program. His respect was genuine and it was clear that these were his true feelings. However, the interlocutor in question is also one of the most vitriolic in the State media, specializing in negative and inaccurate reporting about Embassy programs. Another example of this "schizophrenic" behavior may be seen in state television figure Yevgeniy Novikov. A regular fixture on outlandish exposes and segments covering the U.S. Embassy, Novikov was a Democracy Commission grantee in 1998, who has since joined the GOB media apparatus. Engaging (and Responding to) State Media -------------- ¶8. (SBU) The presence of the state media is a fact of life here. While we can be 100% certain that interviews will not be broadcast or reported accurately, brief interviews seem to be preferable to the alternative (shots of Embassy staff furtively departing the scene, having refused to speak). Unless asked directly by the independent media to comment, we almost always ignore the outlandish accusations of the state media; given the highly proscribed reach of the independent media, responding to GOB criticisms only perpetuates them. To combat GOB accusations, post has expanded efforts to reach out to a wider and younger audience to better educate Belarusians about American culture, society and values. Conclusion -------------- ¶9. Belarusian state-controlled media will continue its negative and inaccurate biased reporting against the Embassy and both U.S. and Western institutions in general, with special attention paid on the occasion of major opposition, USG, UN, or EU events and activities. As long as Belarus' dictator continues to rule, we can expect to remain in the spotlight of his "journalist" stooges. However optimistically, we can hope that all of the attention paid to us -- including coverage of our visits to parts of Belarus where Lukashenko never appears -- may supplement the freer information that trickles from independent media sources, and helps the Belarusian people reach their own conclusions about the state of their country. Stewart