Hugh Semberley and Dan Mayer. "Belarus: New Hope for a Forgotten Country." Europa Journal. February 2002. Pages 18-26.
Belarus occupies an advantageous position in the middle of Europe. This fact has contributed much to its development, but has also made it the backdrop for territorial disputes between states.
The growth and development of urban settlements was encouraged by land and waterways, including the well-known trade route from Scandinavia to Southern Europe, which served as a trade route uniting the northern and southern lands. These links have determined the development of the present-day urban settlements system in Belarus.
Towards the beginning of the 20th century, during a period of intense railway construction, Belarus' transport system began to take on its present appearance, thereby enhancing its transport accessibility. This is one of the most important factors of the country's further development, which, unfortunately has not been put to its full use. In the long term, the realization of the existing opportunities for further development is linked with a deepening cultural and economic integration with Europe, along with the ongoing integration with Russia. To Belarus, the latter process represents the strategically important Eastern dimension of its geopolitical position.
This process should begin with the development of the trans-European transport corridor, connecting Eastern and Western Europe (Paris to Moscow, via Brussels, Berlin, Warsaw, Brest and Minsk). This corridor, which includes rail and motor roads, as well as telecommunication, power transmission and oil and gas pipelines, passes through five of the fourteen Belarusian cities with a population of over 100,000, including the capital city Minsk.
Nearly one-third of the country's population lives within one hour's travel of this corridor. The nearby cities are invested with more than one-third of the Belarus' economic potential. Urban areas along this corridor have higher rates of growth, and rural areas have a more favorable demographic structure than the rest of the country.
Other important gateways for communication connect St. Petersburg and Odessa, passing through Vitebsk, Gomel and Kiev, as well as Tallinn and Kiev, via Riga, Vilnius, Minsk and Gomel. These are major areas of economic growth, which constitute a major reserve for raising the quality of life in the majority of the country's settlements. They are also the areas most vulnerable to environmental degradation, thus requiring the organization of more scientifically-based approaches to the economic activities on their territories.
Inside the country, the transport network is less developed and represented entirely by motor roads (Minsk to Vitebsk, Minsk to Slutsk, or Minsk to Mogilev). The modernization of these roads began in the 1970's and 1980's and is still far from complete. Some regional capitals, such as Brest and Grodno, and other major cities, e.g. Mozyr and Zhlobin, have no direct road connections altogether.
The well-preserved and dense ecosystems of Belarus are of great environmental significance to Eastern and Western Europe. The Belarusian lake district, located in the North of the country, is part of the larger Baltic lake area, stretching from Germany, through Poland, Lithuania, Belarus and Latvia, to Russia. Large areas in Poland and Belarus form a common forest belt encompassing Knyszynska Pushcha, the Belarusian and Polish parts of Belovezhskaya Pushcha, as well as Ruzhanskaya and Nalibokskaya Pushchas in Belarus. The Belarusian Polessye district is part of a strip of European marshlands and forest that extends from Poland to Ukraine. Under the international agreement The Green Lungs of Europe signed in 1993 by representatives of a number of governments, the entire territory of Belarus, along with Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, the Eastern part of Poland, and the Western part of Russia, requires special efforts directed towards preserving natural ecosystems and implementing environmentally friendly modes of economic activity
The Ministry of Statistics and Analysis said that the population shrank by 19,900 people in the first eight months of the year to 9,999,600 people as of September 1 2000. Belarus is likely to enter the year 2001 with a population of about 9,990,000.
A natural decrease in the country's population has been observed since 1994. It has decreased by more than 300,000 people in the last 6 years, the longest population decline in Belarus' history caused by natural reasons. In January-August 2000, 9.4 people were born per 1,000 compared with about 14 people in 1990. The death rate in these years was 10.7 and 13.6 people per 1,000, respectively.
The main causes of deaths in Belarus are diseases of the blood circulation system, which account for 53 percent of the total number of deaths, cancers (14 percent) and accidents, poisonings and injuries (12 percent). Before, population declines were caused by epidemics, for instance, the plague of 1563-1566, and wars. More than 50 percent of the Belarusian population perished as a result of the 1654-1667 war between the alliance of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Litva, and Moscow. The 1700-1721 Nothern war killed one third of the Belarusian population. About 1.2 million Belarusians died during World War I. Population growth slowed under Josef Stalin's rule. In the period from 1927 to 1932, the Belarusian population increased by 720,000 while by only 220,000 from 1933 to 1938.
Belarus' population reached the 10-million level twice in the country's history in 1939 and 1986. In 1939, Belarus' population was 11 million after the annexation of Western Belarus to the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic. In 1939-1940, the USSR government gave the Vilnya (Vilnius) province to Lithuania and the Belarusian population dropped to 10.5 million.
World War II killed about 3 million Belarusians and displaced 1 million. Belarus' population was about 6.3 million in 1945. The return and re-evacuation of people who left the country during the war resulted in a sharp increase in the population. In 1950, more than 7.7 million people lived in the country.
The transfer of the Bialystok district and three districts in the Brest region to Poland and labor migration to Siberia caused another drop in the population. In 1951 and 1952, Belarus' population decreased by 88,000 people, and in 1954 by 28,000. A lengthy population growth that followed brought the number of Belarusians to 8 million in 1958, 9 million in 1970 and 10 million in 1986.
Since 1994, the population has decreased by 20,000 to 40,000 every year.
World War II and the subsequent process of Russification dramatically altered Belarus' economy. Before the war, Belarus was predominantly rural and most Belarusans were peasants. In 1939, eight out of every ten were working in agriculture. (Vakar, 17) The devastating consequences of the war, however, forced a rapid urbanization and industrialization of the country. Rural areas became neglected wastelands, while the larger cities were built up with factories. Data concludes that indeed the economy did recover and grow, but this industrial growth occurred at the expense of the countryside. While the cities were expanding, hundreds of thousands were living in poverty and trying to deal with the losses of the war.
German occupation in Belarus began in 1941 and did not cease until 1944. The occupation resulted in 2.2 million deaths, the destruction of 209 cities and townships and 9,200 villages, and uncounted material losses. (Zaprudnik, 239) An American observer who traveled to Belarus still two years after the war commented that "During six months...I traveled from one end of this republic to the other and I can only think of it as the most devastated country in the world. "(Vakar, 209) Acres of buildings were destroyed in cities and towns, and Minsk itself was 80 percent destroyed. In rural areas, 1,215,000 houses and farm buildings were destroyed and more than 3,000,000 people were rendered homeless. Roads were unpassable, communications were disrupted, equipment was destroyed, and the economy had returned to the Stone Age. (Vakar, 209)
The results of this plan were apparent. By the end of the plan period, industrial output in the republic already exceeded the prewar level by 16%. This was a result of the development of machine building, energy production, and the chemicals industry. (Marples, 20) Civil construction continued at a steady pace and cities began to grow. Between November 1946 and December 1952, machine building and consumer goods-producing factories opened in Minsk, Viciebsk, and other cities. Schools and hospitals were built, a streetcar line was opened in Minsk, and in 1956 the Minsk Television Center began transmissions. (Zaprudnik, 114) Within five years, planners had claimed that their plan was most successfully completed. (211, Vakar) Belarus was on its way to becoming a major industrial region in the USSR.
The rebuilding and repair of the economy is obvious when analyzing trends in industrial output. Soviet planners were clearly interested in industrial growth, and they achieved this in Belarus. They boasted their success by announcing to the public that the vitality and strength of the Soviet system proved strikingly manifest in Belorussia's rapid recovery. (Vakar, 211) What they failed to show to the Belarusan public and even the West, however, was the continued devastation of the countryside that had been neglected after the war. When assessing the performance of the Soviet-type economy in Belarus on the whole, the terrible situation in the rural areas must be taken into account.
Official Soviet documents cover up much of the suffering in the countryside. The Soviet government did not allow the world to know that ten years after the expulsion of the Fascists, people still huddled in dug-outs, lacking the most essential items. (Zaprudnik, 113) The villages lacked amenities, roads, educational and cultural establishments, and was regarded by the authorities as little more than a supplier of goods to the town. (Marples, 21) One Soviet source admitted: Many party and soviet organizations weakly led agriculture, and soviet organizations failed to procure a high tempo for the reestablishment and development of collective farm production. State policy neglected Belarusan agriculture and those who made a life from it. For the authorities, postwar recovery lay in the development of the city and the city industries. (Marples, 21) The circumstances in the countryside leaves the impression that after World War II, except for the privileged group, the Belorussian people still live in the squalid poverty of old, accentuated by drastic regimentation of labor. (212, Vakar)
It is clear that the Russification and industrialization of Belarus turned the country into an industrial center. The post-war economy was based predominantly on industry, and this trend would continue for decades. Industrial output increased and the industrial sector grew rapidly in the late 1940s and early 50s. Throughout the Cold War, Belarus was a main Soviet producer of tractors, fertilizers, and synthetic fibers. However, the success of the economy can be gauged not only by industrial growth and strength; other factors must be accounted for. When considering the conditions in rural Belarus, conditions which were hidden to the world by the Soviet government, it seems as if the economy was not as successful as the central planners would have liked for it to be. The Soviet-type economy focused on industrial success while forcing the population, especially the peasants, to constantly sacrifice and suffer. This trend was found throughout the USSR, but was predominant in Belarus. The preferential treatment of industry throughout the Cold War, but especially in the post-war era, would eventually contribute to the weakening rather than to the strengthening of the economy.
Throughout the 20th century, the country of Belarus has undergone a series of economic upheavals, all caused by changes in the political climate in which it exists. Since the time before Stalin to the end of the Soviet Union, this agrarian society has ridden the waves of fortune with its parent country. Recently, however, it has been forced to stand on its own and has fallen behind more industrialized countries such as Russia. This country presents a vivid example of a small nation trying to grow a modern economy. For much of the 20th century, Belarus was closely linked to the rest of the Eastern Block countries. It enjoyed a relatively stable economy throughout most of the time, partially caused by the western half of the area being part of Poland and the rest part of the Russian Federation, two larger, stabilizing entities. Political reforms known as the New Economic Policy helped liberalize the economy, allowing for a large amount of prosperity in the 1920's, only to be blackened when Stalin began his campaign to collectivize agriculture in 1929. His attempts to incentivize workers to leave the farms and move into the factories caused turmoil in the fields and a disruption in an otherwise established way of life. More importantly this forced societal shift put an inordinate amount of strain on the fledgling socialistic food distribution network, causing shortages of agricultural goods throughout the country. The resulting tension from the intense famine led to the revolts against Lenin in 1921, landing many of the farmers, intellectuals, and nationalists in prison, further destabilizing the region. Despite the sharp disruptions these activities caused, Belarus managed to regain a fairly stable equilibrium. This equilibrium lasted until the Second World War, was sharply interrupted, and then re-established again thereafter. The unification of eastern and western Belarus after the war in 1945 created an influx of immigration, increasing economic growth and activity. Following the World War came the Cold War. For most of these years, the economy of the area was combined with that of the Soviet Union, with information regarding its economy locked forever behind the politics of the Iron Curtain. All of this changed with the fall of the Soviet Union. Previously considered one of the strongest and most stable economies of the Soviet Union, Belarus has been slow to embrace a market economy, even resorting to socialistic practices to achieve growth. In response to high inflation, falling GDP and GNP, and increasing population growth, the President of Belarus, Alyaksandr Lukashenko, instituted a new reform of 'market socialism' in 1995. This new policy turned more power over to state and government officials who imposed strict administrative controls over prices and currency exchange rates. The government also expanded its right to interfere with the management of privately owned small businesses. This caused an environment antagonistic to small businesses, and in turn hurt domestic and foreign investment. Following with the goals of this policy, price controls were set on both goods and consumer prices causing shortages and a black market. Also during this time, to pay off foreign and domestic debts resulting from previous borrowing, the Belarusian ruble was devalued from a 1-to-1 Russian to Belarusian ruble exchange rate in 1992 to a 4-to-1 ratio in 1995. This caused a devaluation of the ruble on the international market, with the US exchange rate plummeting from a 1-to-740,000 US dollar to ruble ratio in 1992 to a 1-to-11,500 ratio in 1995. These practices also dampened trade both in international and local markets. In desperate hopes for recovery from its economic deterioration, Belarus applied for US financial aid and economic development assistance. Because the goal of this US AID program is to promote stability and a market-oriented economy, the political atmosphere has once again hindered growth. The government's slow rate of political restructuring has caused the country to be 'red-flagged' as a lagging reformer among the New Independent States, increasing the pressure on both sides. Despite the tension, the program has helped in some areas where US AID workers have promoted small-scale privatization, demonstrating the benefits of a market-driven economy. Trade patterns remain another dilemma for this weak economy with its main trading partner as Russia, accounting for over 50% of exports and imports. Currently, Belarus remains self-isolated from the West and its large, open markets. Further economic problems stem from two consecutive bad harvests ('98-'99) and continuing trade deficits. With most of the former Soviet countries having economic difficulties as well, the best way to chart Belarus' progress is by comparing it to another former Soviet country, Russia. The GDP in Belarus is fueled primarily by agriculture, industry and services, which compromise 23%, 28% and 49% of the economy, respectively. This breakdown is a sharp contrast to Russia's, which has respective percentages closer to 8.5%, 38%, and 54%. These percentages could account for the differences in types of exports with Belarus primarily specializing in agricultural goods (fertilizers, grain, and potatoes) and Russia focusing more on industrial goods (petroleum products, chemicals, and metals). In contrast to the near hyperinflation levels that torment Belarus (as high as 295% in 1998), Russia maintains inflation levels on average of 20% to an unusual high of 86% in 1998. Despite lower levels of inflation, a wealth of natural resources, a high population of educated people, and a diverse industrial base, the Russian GDP has continued to contract since the split, and has fallen by nearly 45%. However, the Belarusian GDP has actually shown improvement since its significant but expected drop after the fall of the former Soviet Union. This can be credited to the small-scale privatization efforts that have caused growth in the real GDP of up to 7% annually. These numbers indicate that despite the turmoil, the steady, stable economy that Belarus enjoyed at the beginning of the 20th century may once again return. Throughout the century, Belarus has survived through political change and upheaval, each time finding its way back to a relatively constant economy. Despite its difficulties, the information above shows that better times may once again be slowly returning to an economy that is rooted in the soil.