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