SLAVA UKRAINI! ЖЫВЕ БЕЛАРУСЬ!

Author: © Nacionalinė nevyriausybinių vystomojo bendradarbiavimo organizacijų platforma / Lithuanian NGDO Platform

Contact: Justina Kaluinaitė, justina@vbplatforma.org

Cover photo: Tina Hartung / Unsplash.com

This publication is part of the projects #DCandNGOS3.0 funded by Lithuanian Ministry of Social Security and Labour and Eurodad network capacity building funded by EC. The publication and its contents are the sole responsibility of Lithuanian NGDO Platform and do not necessarily reflect the views of the donors.

What is Ukraine to do With her government’s debt?

Joint statement of Lithuanian, Latvian, and Estonian Development cooperation Platforms regarding your support to Ukraine & Ukrainians

We stand with the Ukraine and call on Russia to Stop the War Now

Belarusian civil society in Lithuania: how really welcome are we?

From Kaunas to Yerevan and back: Visiting the Red Cross in Armenia

WHAT IS UKRAINE TO DO WITH HER GOVERNMENT’S DEBT?

Published: Lrytas.lt 2022 04 27

Among the numerous pledges to “help Ukraine”, over the last few weeks various governments and multilateral institutions have been providing huge sums in “emergency funding”, but the majority come in the form of loans. This means an even bigger financial burden on the shoulders of ordinary people of Ukraine in the near future.

But there are other ways to do things, argue certain civil society actors. These require a 180-degree change of course in the way things are done financially and politically.

In a debt swamp

With millions of Euros and US dollars currently outpouring from Ukraine’s treasury to service its government’s foreign debt repayments, the age-old issue of debt relief is making a reappearance in this context, too, as it has with, for example, the Jubilee 2000 campaign more than two decades ago. It includes, among others, the questions of unjust and/or unsustainable debt and also the legitimacy of financial and political dictates to sovereign states by major lenders, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank.

So how much exactly have the recent governments of Ukraine borrowed on behalf of the people of Ukraine? Data varies depending on source. According to the UK’s leading NGO focusing on global debt, Jubilee Debt Campaign, Ukraine’s total external government debt currently

stands at $54.3bn, while World Bank puts it at almost $130bn. The latter amounts to almost 80% of Ukraine’s GDP.

Either way, that is a lot of money that the people of Ukraine are expected to pay “back”, whatever the circumstances.

Loan sharks

Despite its loud slogans of “freedom” and “democracy”, the EU too has played a major role in Ukraine’s debt crisis. Most recently, on 21 February 2022, the Council of the EU announced “an emergency macro-financial assistance operation of €1.2 billion in the form of loans”, but it comes with (tight) strings attached. The two disbursements, to be released over the course of 12 months, are subject to “satisfactory implementation of the IMF programme”.

Why the EU would provide loans to its neighbouring country only under the IMF’s conditions, when the two are, supposedly, independent, is not explained. Especially taking into account the fact that international institutions such as the IMF are unelected and highly unaccountable.

Over the last eight years the EU had provided Ukraine with such “macro-financial assistance operations” as the one mentioned above that are worth €5 billion, among other financial deals. According to Eurodad – the European Network on Debt and Development, apart from the EU itself, major bilateral creditors to Ukraine include Germany, France, and Poland, as well as the European Investment Bank and other EU institutions.

The United States of America are also deeply involved in Ukraine’s debt problem, mainly through the IMF and World Bank which they in essence control. This is well

Lithuanian NGDO Platform

@Elena Mozhvilo

illustrated by what the IMF calls “surcharges”, which are basically a system of fees on loans paid on top of regular interest payments on loans. This places an unfair burden on vulnerable countries and brings even more profits to the IMF itself. It works like this: in February, Ukraine was scheduled to deliver to the IMF $197 million in debt repayment; out of this sum some $35 million is made up of surcharges. As if nobody had a different idea of how that money could have been spent?

What is to be done – and by whom?

In a statement, Justina Kaluinaite, Lithuanian NGDO Platform’s Policy and Advocacy Officer, sets out her organisation’s position on the issue of Ukraine’s foreign debt: There are calls to cancel (parts of) Ukraine’s foreign debt or to suspend (parts of) it temporarily; there are calls for the IMF to scrap its unfair “surcharges”; and there are calls to restructure the whole global financing system. However, based on past experiences, the latter are the least likely to be implemented.

Jubilee Debt Campaign has issued a recommendation which calls for the UK government to “use its influence to push the IMF and World Bank” to “cancel Ukraine’s debt to free up funds for immediate relief and for future reconstruction”.

It also said that financial support to Ukraine should include both debt relief and grants, “so that Ukraine is not left servicing its current debt while taking on even more loans with more damaging conditions”. Over the last decades this has been the dim and unfair reality for many a country that have been forced to obey the rules of the IMF and World Bank.

Signals coming from Ukraine herself regarding the country’s foreign debt vary and so far have not been clearly communicated to the outside, possibly due to lack of agreement among civil society and the decision-makers. It is also highly likely that most people in Ukraine currently have other things on their mind and foreign debt is not a priority on that list.

From the European civil society’s point of view

In an email interview, Iolanda Fresnillo, Eurodad’s Policy and Advocacy Manager for Debt Justice, sets out her organisation’s position on the issue of Ukraine’s foreign debt.

What is Eurodad’s current position on Ukraine’s foreign debt?

Our position on Ukraine’s foreign debt is the same we have for all countries that are dealing with external catastrophic shocks. A country facing a military aggression, like Russia’s on Ukraine, should not have to be subject to debt payments while dealing with the humanitarian impacts of the aggression. The same as a country facing devastation by a hurricane or a global pandemic should not have to prioritise external debt payments over reconstruction or people’s survival. We understand that such countries should have at their disposal multilateral mechanisms to support them, also by cancelling or freezing debt pay-

ments. This should be part of a broader debt architecture reform.

It is inconceivable that a country going through a humanitarian crisis such as the one that Ukraine is currently facing should at the same time have to serve its foreign creditors, including private investment funds and banks, multilateral institutions, and official bilateral creditors. According to World Bank’s estimates, in 2022 Ukraine will be paying almost US$ 4 billion to bondholders and banks, and an additional billion to multilateral and bilateral creditors. Those resources should stay in the country to protect its citizens and provide emergency relief. The formulation could be a debt payment moratorium or debt payment cancellation.

Apart from not having an established mechanism that could grant such debt relief, one of the problems in this case is that the Ukrainian government has expressed their desire to continue honouring debt payments. The objective is merely to satisfy credit rating agencies and financial markets, so the country can continue accessing market finance after the war. The country has set up “a fund to service and repay the sovereign debt”, and as the Ukrainian prime minister declared, they are “counting on the understanding of the situation and the filling of this fund”. Which means that part of the financial support the country is receiving from bilateral donors and multilateral institutions will probably end up in this fund and, ultimately, in the hands of bondholders and other creditors.

Why is Eurodad advocating for an automatic debt suspension mechanism? How could that be beneficial to the people in the long-term?

As mentioned, we understand that the best option – not only for Ukraine, but for other countries facing external catastrophic shocks as well – is to keep resources in the country in order to be able to face the most pressing needs, protect the people, provide emergency relief, food and medical supplies, and, ultimately, reconstruction and

Justina Kaluinaite, Lithuanian Lithuanian NGDO Platform’s Policy and Advocacy Officer

recovery. The proposal for an automatic debt suspension mechanism that could be of use for Ukraine is actually a proposal that civil society has been making in relation to climate-vulnerable countries in the wake of extreme climatic events such as hurricanes, droughts or floods. Leaving financial resources available in the country is simply the easiest, fastest, and most reliable way to provide support for emergency relief and the first efforts towards reconstruction.

The world is living through a multiplicity of dramatic shocks that impact on the countries’ ability to protect people’s well-being at the same time as honouring debt obligations. The Covid-19 pandemic constitutes one striking example, but we could also think of extreme climatic events such as hurricanes or droughts, natural disasters such as the volcano eruption in Tonga a few months ago or, in this case, Russian aggression in Ukraine. In such cases, governments find themselves having to repay external debt obligations at the same time as facing the impacts of catastrophic events and finding financial resources to pay for emergency needs, reconstruction and recovery.

For such cases, CSOs are proposing that governments and international institutions set up an automatic mechanism for a debt payment moratorium in the wake of a catastrophic external shock (extreme climate events, natural disasters, pandemic, military aggression or other). In the wake of such events, debt payments could be automatically and temporarily suspended for a determined period. Importantly, this should not trigger a downgrade in the country’s sovereign debt rating. At the end of this period a debt sustainability analysis should be conducted, taking into account the losses and damages caused by the catastrophic event, as well as the financing needs for recovery and reconstruction, providing debt restructuring and debt cancellation that is needed in each case. Such a mechanism should cover public and private lenders, and should be in addition to immediate access to non-debt creating resources for dealing with the emergency and financing reconstruction and recovery.

What do you see as the best possible scenario for the people of Ukraine and other highly indebted countries in terms of financial independence from foreign loans and consequently debt?

We understand that the current international financial architecture does not offer an optimal framework nor does it guarantee a fair, lasting, comprehensive, and timely resolution to debt challenges, or responsible and concessive financing options for middle income countries such as Ukraine. However, there is a number of strategies to build stronger financial independence from borrowing and, particularly, financial markets, for highly indebted countries like Ukraine.

The first one is debt restructuring. We believe that even within the current system it is better to undertake early and strong debt restructuring when there are debt problems, rather than continue paying debts in full, which makes the crisis more protracted and more severe. All countries facing debt distress should have a timely and

comprehensive process available to restructure their debts, including debt cancellation when needed, based not only on payment capacity analysis but also on the financial needs to cope with the climate crisis and to advance towards the UN’s Sustainable development goals.

The second possible strategy has to do with development and climate finance. Here, countries of the Global North as well as other most polluting countries should deliver on their commitments to provide development finance and climate finance. These two should be non-debt creating and be provided without conditions, which means they should be primarily delivered in the form of grants. If loans are to be used, it should only be in highly concessional terms and only for certain purposes and programmes that will not lead to the accumulation of unsustainable and illegitimate debt. Any new lending and borrowing should be made following responsible lending and borrowing rules, including hurricane clauses and other state contingent clauses so that debt cancellation is automatically granted in the case of climate, health and other emergencies. Development and climate finance should also be public and disbursed for public and publicly accountable programmes and projects rather than private for-profit initiatives or public-private partnerships.

Thirdly, we should be looking at domestic resource mobilization (DRM) and tackling illicit financial flows. In our opinion, governments should be able to increase DRM by effectively fighting tax dodging and harmful tax competition, as well as building and promoting sufficient and gender-responsive progressive tax systems, ensuring that the rich and multinational corporations pay their dues. In relation to this, international financial institutions such as World Bank or the IMF should stop promoting regressive tax policies, in particular the VAT. The only way to avoid borrowing without cutting expenditure is raising revenue through tax systems. In relation to tackling tax dodging, it is time to back a truly universal, intergovernmental process at the UN to comprehensively address tax havens, tax abuse by multinational corporations and other illicit financial flows that obstruct redistribution and drain resources that are crucial to challenging inequalities. Taxing income, wealth, and trade should be seen to support the internationally agreed human rights frameworks, as without taxation we cannot mobilise the maximum available

Iolanda Fresnillo, Eurodad’s Policy and Advocacy Manager for Debt Justice

revenues. Tax abuse and tax avoidance also need to be considered under the extraterritorial obligations of states towards other states not to hamper the enjoyment of human rights by blocking financing through abusive tax laws and allowing companies and wealthy individuals to abuse tax systems.

And lastly, there is the whole issue of reforming the current international financial architecture. Governments and international organisations should work towards this reform in order to bring international finance in line with universally accepted human rights obligations, including the right to development, gender equality and the right of all to live in a healthy environment. Such reform should address the need for a fair, transparent and multilateral framework for debt crisis resolution under the auspices of the UN and not in lender-dominated arenas, which addresses unsustainable and illegitimate debt, but also regulation of the financial sector – including actors such as credit rating agencies – to ensure that Global South countries have the fiscal and policy space to address their development challenges.

Current Ukraine situation apart, the World Bank, the IMF, banks and other such lenders have been using the same loan and debt mechanism in the Global South – and not only – for decades, with green light from governments and disastrous consequences for the people. There have been many calls by various CSOs to restructure global financial systems and yet nothing has changed in essence, apart from a few carrots here and there. So how is it any different this time around and how can big creditors realistically be forced to stop their practices?

Neoliberalism has brought us extensive deregulation processes that allowed private financial institutions to thrive and grow, on many occasions at the expense of people’s well-being by promoting speculation and irresponsible lending. We need to somehow reverse that process, with further regulation and legislation to protect the public.

You are right that the attempts so far to reform global financial systems have failed. The multiplicity of crises and the realisation that countries are more vulnerable precisely because of globalisation and deregulation, can become opportunities for reform. But in order to make the most of these opportunities we need to be better prepared, better organised and be more. The process towards a new Finance for Development conference at the UN level could become an opportunity for such an agenda for structural reforms.

But again, it is on us, social movements and civil society organisations, to be able to put pressure on governments and international institutions and to raise our ambitions in order for such a process to deliver results. This might sound naive, but the only way to force big creditors to change their practices is by leaving them no other option. Not by inviting them to voluntarily improve, but by legislating and promoting international agreements on reforming the international financial system, including regulation and supervision of credit rating agencies, regulation and supervision of the asset management industry and a global agreement on the importance of capital account management.

@Nataliia Kvitovska / Lviv

Joint statement of

Lithuanian, Latvian,

and

Estonian

Development cooperation Platforms regarding your support to Ukraine & Ukrainians

As civil society organizations, development cooperation, and humanitarian action Platform and the members, many of which are working for many years in Ukraine on various topics, we are shocked by the recent developments in Ukraine, and also we are FOCUSED on that actions should be taken now. We Lithuanian NGDO Platform, LAPAS, AKÜ are calling you, our CSO community, networks, individuals to ACT, SUPPORT, and SHARE the full focus of actions, advocacy, and solidarity in any form possible for you. ANY support matters, ANY actions matter.

Demonstrations of support

• Express your position to your government, local decision-makers, and any policy representatives urging them to support Ukraine and push for more sanctions. This could be done in

 Verbally addressing the key elements:  Using our template letter as a sample. A template letter can be found here

• Organize, join and support local peaceful demonstrations, any form of peaceful solidarity actions, online media campaigns, share and connect with #StandWithUkraine #SlavaUkraini #StopRussianAggression

• For your respectful donors (ministries, foundations, etc) request emergency funding for Ukraine and/or emergency local funds for CSOs to coordinate actions at the national/ regional level related to Ukraine.

• Check the sources of information. Be aware of the high level of disinformation.

We reccomend:

Ukrainian MFA and English-language outlets The Kyiv Independent and The New Voice of Ukraine

• Encourage, launch, support the volunteering. Launch the database if your country hasn‘t yet received Ukrainian fleeing the war, reach out to your national/local Ukrainian community - find them, volunteer to support emotionally and in any other way of your ability.

• Find or launch the support call in assisting people fleeing war in logistics, shelter, necessities.

• Encourage your municipality and local authorities to launch specific info email on supportUkraine@ to coordinate the needs and information in their abilities.

• National Red Cross, Malteser, Caritas, Save the Children, Foodbank, Unicef societies - find them, check the ways to contribute and help.

What can you do to support Ukraine & Ukrainians?

• Donate (The funds donated directly or to either of these organizations will be used for logistical and medical support.)

 Russia-Ukraine War: Info and ways to help - information and ways to help

 Ministry of Defense of Ukraine - Donation for the logistic and medical support of the Armed Forces of Ukraine

 „Come Back Alive“ - support for the army, fight against disinformation. Various options are found on the site.

 „Army SOS“ - charity fund.

• Specific donation for our recommended and trusted organizations:

 Lithuanian NGO “Blue and Yellow” specifically supports Ukraine, its Armed Forces, and the civil population in the Donbas area since 2014. We have provided almost 1 million USD worth of humanitarian aid and military equipment. Members of the organization have been decorated several times by Ukrainian civil and military authorities. They are there, now.

 Estonian initiative “For Ukraine!” combines three organizations working directly with people in need in Ukraine, evacuating them to Estonia and supporting them during their stay in Estonia. https://www.ukrainaheaks.ee/en

• Take personal action - do not buy Russian or Belarussian-made products, ban and report propaganda messages online, research on Russian-owned international brands.

Share the support message to other national, regional, international networks.

Go out, send, ask, demand the actions.

For regional cooperation feel free to contact us:

Lithuanian Platform - Lithuanian NGDO Platform - Justina justina@vbplatforma.org

Latvian Platform - LAPAS - Inese inese.vaivare@lapas.lv

Estonian Platform - AKÜ - Susanna susanna@terveilm.ee

We stand with the Ukraine and call on Russia to Stop the War Now

This peace order needs to include the security interests of all countries in the region and the world – including of Russia and Ukraine. No powerful country shall be a threat to other countries. Therefore, we call on Russia, Ukraine, NATO, the United States, the European Union and others, to seek a long-term and sustainable political solution for all parties. To be clear: These legitimate interests can by no means be a reason or excuse to invade another country.

We call for a strong reaction from the international community:

Call on Russia and Belarus to stop the military operation now. We demand all countries to condemn the aggression in unambiguous terms.

To implement strong sanctions targeting the elite and ability to finance the war:

a. Block the Russian the richest 0.5 to 1% from accessing their foreign assets.

b. Stop energy imports from Russia, which are financing the military.

Use all diplomatic means to end the war by respecting the democratic choices of the Ukrainian or other people.

Support refugees fleeing from the war and respect their human rights and lift visa requirements and give safe passage – including for non-Ukrainians.

Support refugees fleeing from the war and respect their human rights and lift visa requirements and give safe passage – including for non-Ukrainians.

We are shocked by Russian President’s decision to invade Ukraine. We condemn this war with wide-ranging civilian casualties and demand an immediate ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian troops.

We stand with Ukraine. We express our solidarity with Ukraine and Ukrainian people facing a humanitarian disaster. In particular we condemn deliberate or accidental targeting of civilian institutions as the shelling of an orphanage, a kindergarten and a hospital has shown.

We also express our solidarity with the Russian people and Russians outside Russia who will be very strongly affected by this war as well. This is a war of the Russian government and not of the Russian people.

We are very concerned that this grave violation of international law will have an extremely adverse impact on security and democracy in Europe and the World. Multilateral efforts to solve the social and economic crisis caused by COVID-19, the ongoing climate crisis and the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will be badly affected by this war – including by increased military spending.

The priority is to stop the war now. This war shows also the urgent need to create a European and global peace order with less and not with more weapons. There is a danger of a spiral of militarization. Increased military spending is not the solution. This starts with the language we use including the threat of the nuclear weapons. This emphasizes the importance that all countries ratify the Treaty of Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) as soon as possible.

Urgently allocate humanitarian support to Ukraine, support civil society actions and cancel Ukrainian debts.

We call on civil society to:

Go out into the streets all over the world to demand peace and express solidarity to Ukraine – for example in front of Russian embassies.

Launch and participate in online campaigns, join #WeStandWithUkraine with sharing information, solidarity videos etc. Send emails, ask politicians questions on any occasions about actions to stop the war.

Provide and organize humanitarian support to the people in Ukraine & to refugees – and connect with Ukrainian and Russian diasporas in your countries.

Truth is always the first victim of a war. Inform yourself and be aware of the high level of disinformation. Check the sources. Check what you share.

The Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP) is a global movement with civil society coalitions in 58 countries with 11,000 member organisations. GCAP supports the people in their struggles for justice and brings people and organisations together to challenge the institutions and processes that perpetuate poverty and inequalities across the world, to defend and promote human rights, gender justice, social justice and security needed for the dignity and peace of everyone.

Tuesday March 1st, 2022

Author: GCAP Global Co-author, Justina Kaluinaite, policy and advocacy officer Lithuanian NGDO Platform, global council member GCAP

#WeStandWithUkraine

Belarusian civil society in Lithuania: how really welcome are we?

Published:

Over the last several years, more and more Belarusian Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) have been relocating to Lithuania after it became too difficult or, in some cases, even impossible for them to operate in their home country due to political reasons. However, the official position of the Lithuanian government pronounces that they are most welcome, and the government indeed assisted them such as simplified visa procedures, financial support, and politically expressed refuge from Minsk.

However, problems remain, yet they are not unsolvable. Here, several Belarusian civil society representatives discuss some of those problems and, at the same time, suggest their solutions. Some responsibility also falls on the Lithuanian civil society.

Legal terra incognita, arrogance of the banks, and other challenges

While the general environment in Lithuania for Belarusian NGOs is quite friendly, several issues make a life for them somewhat difficult, says Anna Gerasimova, independent expert, analyst, and former Director of the Belarusian Human Rights House. First of all, these are formal requirements, such as legislation applicable to NGOs not being translated into a language other than Lithuanian.

“In some cases, the most recent translation of a law is from 2009, while the latest amendments [to that particular law] were made in 2020. This is clearly not a situation where one would want to rely on Google Translate, so it’s difficult for Belarusian NGOs to know how to really operate here,” Gerasimova says. As a result, Lithuanian civil society actors in Lithuania are forced to spend their precious resources on translation and legal advisory services. It also further complicates issues such as accounting, which in itself is already complex for cross-border activities.

Zmicer Herylovich of the Belarusian National Youth Council RADA agrees, explaining the lack of legal requirements in a language that the Belarusian civil society speaks – preferably Russian but also English. “Legislation and taxation issues are still terra incognita for those who relocate to Lithuania from Belarus,” he says.

This partly relates to the actual logistics of registering a non-governmental organisation, and secondly, its daily operations in the context of legal requirements. In Lithuania, many government services are accessible online, sometimes – only online, without a paper version that could be obtained in person or by post. While Lithuanian NGOs can register online using a simple procedure – provided they have the so-called “electronic or mobile signature” (accessed through e-banking or e-government services), which residents can easily obtain, – for foreign NGOs that generally do not possess one, the process is much more complex and time-consuming. “So many complications for something that was supposed to be a much easier process,” Gerasimova says.

Lithuanian NGDO Platform

Protests in Minsk, Scanpix

The banks cause another big problem that Belarusian citizens face in Lithuania: more as a rule rather than an exception, commercial banks refuse to open bank accounts for either Belarusian individuals or their NGOs, citing “possible money laundering”. Without a bank account, it is extremely difficult for an organisation to receive funding for its activities, pay salaries for employees and contracted individuals, purchase services or materials they need to operate, etc. Gerasimova says that although this problem is not confined to Lithuania alone, it poses a real threat to the ability of civil society organisations to provide much-needed benefits to communities and the society at large. “Banks started playing the role of a regulator,” Gerasimova says. “So you formally register your organisation in Lithuania, then you go to a bank to open a bank account, and the bank tells you that you have no business being here in Lithuania! We’ve seen many organisations being forced to close their bank accounts and desperately try to find a solution to be able to receive funding. This is a huge problem.”

In the background of these issues, there is also an internal exile-related one, namely – the question of identity. The question arises: how to identify yourself when you are away from Belarus but dealing with Belarus anyway? Tatsiana Chulitskaya, academic Director of the Belarus/ Lithuania-based School of Young Managers in Public Administration (SYMPA), says that today Belarusian civil society basically exists in survival mode.

“Many organisations that have been working for 20 or 30 years have now ceased to exist legally in Belarus and are forced to act from abroad. It is a huge challenge: how to organise their activities and reach their target audience while being elsewhere,” she says. “So in parallel, they have to solve both the issue of survival, i. e., their own physical security, and how to re-establish their activities – or rather start them from zero, how to reach from outside people who are inside. Here, all the organisational support is very much needed.”

Solutions exist, already

Together with listing the problems they face in Lithuania, Belarusian civil society representatives also offer solutions. While some of those are pretty straightforward, others could take longer and would require more effort, mainly from the Lithuanian side.

Making the relevant laws and other legal procedures available in foreign languages, primarily English, is one of those straightforward solutions that government agencies could easily implement. In relation to that is the establishment of a centralised info-point for foreign CSOs operating or wishing to operate in Lithuania, as proposed by Herylovich and agreed to by all other participants. It could be a onestop informational desk where all the legal procedures and requirements demanded by Lithuania’s laws would be explained for foreigners and details regarding visas, residency, taxes, etc.

Having expressed his gratitude for Lithuanian state-sponsored study programmes such as scholarships for Belarusian students to study in Vilnius or support for the European Humanitarian University currently based in Lithuania, Herylovich adds that such programmes should be prolonged and extended. He also says that as the youth sector usually lacks financial resources, institutional support for the rent of premises for youth organisations to meet would be very much welcomed. It would also help cover living wages for youth CSOs, given that average salaries in Lithuania are 2 or 3 times higher than in Belarus, and due to the taxation system, it is often difficult to find the necessary funds to cover administrational costs, as project money is usually designed for activities and re-arranging funds already confirmed by donors is no easy task.

As for the problem with the banks, it is a bit trickier. Rytis Jokubauskas, Director of the Lithuanian NGO Law Institute, has been helping Belarusian NGOs threatened by Lithuanian commercial banks with transferring their data to law enforcement on allegations of money laundering.

@ Jana Shnipelson

This, even though there was no indication of a crime – unless donors such as the Swedish embassy in the Netherlands are for some reason suspicious to Lithuanian banks, most of which have their HQ in that same Scandinavia. But Jokubauskas believes the bank problem, too, could be tackled. “One way would be for governmental institutions to talk to the Lithuanian Central bank, which would, in turn, talk to commercial banks to deliver the message,” he says.

However, both problems and their solutions are not solely for the benefit of the Belarusians, as Gerasimova points out. “We’re talking about Belarus as an exception to the rule. While exceptional measures are being taken [in favour of Belarusian CSOs], I think it’s not so much an exception if Lithuania wants to be open to international actors coming in to drive the economy: the Belarusian CSO case only shows the issues that everybody else will face too,” she says.

At the same time, the commercial banks’ behaviour seems to be dishonest, to say the least. “Robust legislation has been adopted recently across the world in terms of money laundering and tax evasion, but as we have seen from the Pandora papers, these laws only apply to the small and the poor, while the rich and powerful always find a way [to avoid them],” Gerasimova says. Therefore there is the absolute need to first and foremost help the smaller organisations in civil society.

The only Lithuanian government representative present at the online meeting with Belarusian CSO representatives was Justina Lukaševičiūtė, Head of the NGO Development Division at the Ministry of Social Security and Labour. She reiterated that we are now probably “on the right track”, but “the way is long, not short”.

According to her, the most important thing that the Lithuanian government could provide the Belarusian civil society with – which is also what the Lithuanian civil society needs – is education, competence-building and strengthening, to empower the next generation. Lukaševičiūtė says that without competencies in advocacy and other civil activities, it is hard to move forward. Chulitskaya, the Academic Director of SYMPA, confirmed that educational programmes are necessary and appreciated and should be continued. Still, the Belarusian civil society is facing huge problems today, not in 10 years from now. Accordingly, they should be dealt with now. Solutions do not stand in the way of education and do not replace it, nor are they themselves replaced by education.

Why the Minsk-Vilnius route, one-way for now

Recently, the NGO Law Institute in Lithuania published a study titled “Eastern Partnership and Lithuania: Challenges for NGOs, Solutions and Opportunities. Case study: Belarus”, in which it provided an overview of the general situation for NGOs in the EU Eastern Partnership countries – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. The study shows that all six are facing various challenges. “The common trend [in these countries] is that governments don’t trust NGOs very much, which leads

to governments tending to regulate NGOs, and in many cases over-regulate them, as well as impose all sorts of limitations on their activities,” says the Institute’s Director Jokubauskas.

In many ways, this has been the dire reality for CSOs in Belarus in particular, especially over the last couple of years. “CSOs are dealing with a non-friendly environment in Belarus,” Jokubauskas says, adding that the annual CSO Sustainability Index for 2019 shows no significant improvement for CSOs when compared to 2009 – more than a decade ago. And this is without taking into consideration the latest attacks by the state against civil society in Belarus that have greatly increased and intensified in scope since 2020. So while official procedures for registering NGOs in Belarus are not much different from those in other countries, when it comes to implementing them, the reality is that authorities are denying many NGOs registration for political reasons. Additionally, there are no tax exemptions or other positive encouragements from the government for NGOs to act.

Many people actively engaged in civil society actions in Belarus have been threatened, imprisoned, or otherwise persecuted by the Alexander Lukashenka government. As a result, some have chosen to relocate to neighbouring Lithuania and continue their activities from across the border.

Self-notes for the Lithuanian civil society

“What we need is that Lithuanian NGOs participate in advocacy campaigns because it involves communication with Lithuanian governmental bodies. It’s about how to make the legislation more suitable to international aid, not only Belarus. It’s about this problem with banks,” says Natallia Rabava, analyst and SYMPA director. “If we want to change it, we really need well-organised advocacy campaigns, but Belarusian NGOs are not able to organise them themselves without the help from Lithuanian NGOs.” Chulitskaya agrees: “We should have a roundtable with Belarusian and other CSOs, and with all political stake-

@ Andrew Keymaster

holders. Dialogue and consultations must all be inclusive.”

From their own side, Lithuanian civil society actors want to see a more precise direction as formulated by the government: is supporting Belarusians with a safe yet temporary home enough? Do we want to support longterm civil society development? How ready are we to deal with this situation in case its temporality is extended for years or even decades? At the same time, Lithuanian CSOs should clarify first to themselves and then to others what their role in supporting Belarusian CSOs is. What are their tasks, and how to implement them?

“Many of these Belarusian NGOs had been our development cooperation partners before their relocation to Lithuania. Such regional partnership was greatly beneficial to both sides,” says Justina Kaluinaitė, Policy, Advocacy and Partnership Advisor for the Lithuanian NGDO Platform. “The current issues that Belarusian civil society is facing in Lithuania not only require an honest dialogue between all stakeholders, but they also present a great opportunity to become true and equal partners once again. Let us not forget that partnership is what both our Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour publicly declare.”

This aspect becomes even more important given that the need for common inter-institutional policy has greatly increased. Kaluinaitė explains that development cooperation funding provided to some NGOs in the neighbouring country comes from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Still, since Belarusian NGOs are now in Lithuania, they fall under the Ministry of Social Affairs wing, which deals with the non-governmental sector.

Additionally, the focus of Belarusian CSOs has shifted slightly, as their target audience is now partly in Belarus, partly in Lithuania. “We clearly see an urgent need for cooperation and a common strategy towards Lithuania’s assistance to Belarusian civil society in Lithuania,” Kaluinaitė says. “The need for bilingual legislation, wider availability of e-government services and their adaptation to non-residents, a central info point for foreign NGOs operating in Lithuania – these issues were already present yesterday. So the dialogue and action on them have to start, albeit belatedly, today.”

As for the Lithuanian civil society, the Lithuanian NGDO Platform calls for mutual support and inclusiveness. “We should ask our Belarusian colleagues about their needs and find ways to address them. This should not be about leaving the problems for others to solve – we are all responsible in our respective civil society fields. It is never enough to declare political will and support without any real action taken.”

This piece has been prepared by the Lithuanian Development Cooperation Platform. It is based on an online discussion titled Belarusian Civil Society in Lithuania: Integration, Situation, and Next Steps organised by the Lithuanian NGDO and moderated by Gaja Šavelė, Executive Director at Lithuanian NGO Coalition.

@ Dmitry Levkovets

From Kaunas to Yerevan and back: Visiting the Red Cross in Armenia

Published: 15min.lt 2021 11 25

What motivated you to volunteer in Armenia specifically?

I’m following the activities of Red Cross Societies in other countries and the Armenian Red Cross is a very strong one. It is obvious from the information and images they publish, and their social media. So I was very happy to receive an invitation to visit them for three weeks. I was interested in a different culture, their Red Cross programmes, especially the ones they carry out for migrants/refugees, first aid, and disaster management.

“There

Armenia

recruit volunteers. Any project

have 10 times more volunteers than needed,” says Katarina Vardanyan, head of Volunteering, Youth and Membership department at the Armenian Red Cross Society. Recently they also hosted two volunteer experts from the Kaunas and Vilnius city branches of the Lithuanian Red Cross who had come to listen, learn, witness, and share. Here is what they reflected on afterwards.

As recently there had been war on the border with Azerbaijan and that area was still considered a conflict zone, I got to know about International Committee of the Red Cross activities there, such as negotiations for captured prisoners, body recognition and transfer, search for the missing people, and others. I wanted to get as much experience as possible so that I could use it in my work with the Lithuanian Red Cross. I think these are actually the best motivators: getting experience, being in a different culture, and coming to know about their great programmes. What specific things did you do in Armenia and how did they differ from those that you are used to in Lithuania?

I spent most of my time in Armenia with the youth programme called Smiley Club. I observed their activities and had long conversations with volunteers and their team leaders. I regret not having had the time to visit more regional Red Cross branches – apart from the central HQ in Yerevan, I was only in Gyumri.

I noticed that Red Cross activities in Armenia are different from ours. For example, their programme in which volunteers visit lonely elderly people, is very different from our “Warm visits.” In Lithuania each participating volunteer regularly visits one or several senior citizens, while in Armenia every senior receives a group of 5 or 6 volunteers at once, and they spend lots of time talking. In this way they visit quite a good number of elderly people in just one day.

From Kaunas to Yerevan

After state borders were closed following Covid-19 lockdowns in most countries back in March 2020, hosting international volunteers became impossible. “We had some online meetings and exchange of experiences during this time, because the Red Cross is a very big community,” says Kalepsi Chgrikyan, Programme Officer for Youth in Yerevan’s office. “But we were happy to have the two Lithuanian volunteers with us on the ground. It was a great cultural experience first of all for them, and for our volunteers too.”

Laura Belickienė, Human Resources Manager at the Lithuanian Red Cross, and professional photographer Vytautė Stankevičienė, who has been volunteering with the Lithuanian Red Cross for two years, travelled to Armenia as expert volunteers. Here, Vytautė reflects on her threeweek placement with the Armenian Red Cross.

One disadvantage that I felt personally was my short time volunteering with the Red Cross. I’ve been a volunteer since a long time, but with this organisation I’ve only been involved for two years. I felt it on occasions when I was asked a question and could not provide an accurate answer due to my lack of detailed knowledge. But instead, I tried to be creative. As a photographer, I filled that gap with a photography training for Armenian volunteers.

What made a strong impression on you that remained with you after returning?

So many things I observed and explored during my time there! But I think the most important one is about one’s family and extended family. Armenians spend a lot of time with their parents and grandparents. It’s very common for several generations to live together. They have immense respect for the elderly. One woman told me after moving out from her parents’ house because of her work, she was crying every evening for not being able to be with her parents. I advised her to enjoy being independent and doing everything in her own way. She replied: “Our time with our parents on this Earth is so limited, we have to enjoy it and be with them as much as we can”

Lithuanian NGDO Platform

@Armenia Red Cross / Red Cross activities in Armenia

is no problem in

to

will