30 ▶ Political
Natallia Valadzko
Belarus Remembering How to Breathe The text was written in mid-August 2020. e are several months into the new order around the world – the devastating death toll and lockdown consequences, the results of the pandemic. It may not be well-known but the Republic of Belarus is the only country in Europe that did not introduce a strict lockdown. While many countries were declaring “war” on coronavirus, Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko persuaded that COVID-19 resides “only in the heads” of the people and that “hysteria” around it is exaggerated. ‣ As far as Belarus is concerned, despite certain safety precautions in place, it certainly did not feel like the prototypical domain of war, maybe except for its victims. The local discourse of COVID-19 is an exceptionally complex and odd phenomenon; especially due to the fact that the president, with overwhelming executive power, shaped the discourse to his will, which had real-life implications on how unconsciously citizens chose or were forced to behave. ‣ The everyday language used to describe the pandemic may be evidence for how people conceptualize the virus and the strategies of dealing with it. Speeches of many countries’ representatives evoked images of global conflict with the forces of a “deadly enemy” and heroes fighting for the safety and the future of the public “on the front lines”. While the war-like emergency perspective calls for swift collaboration and driven action, one may also talk of “casualties”, “victims”, and “collateral damage”. ‣ The danger is that war language shallows a very complex situation and may cause panic stocking. Moreover, war-waging has intensified racism, sexism, and xenophobia before, and, in this case, it again tends to prioritize national interests. The war
W
framing does not seem to protect the minorities. As the example of the US shows, brown and black communities suffered increasingly more from the coronavirus outbreak. In the pro-active, swift actions aimed at triumphing over the enemy by highlighting the opponent, we dramatically neglect human lives and communities, who become the said casualties and collateral damage. ‣ In his speeches, Lukashenko was calling the virus a global “psychosis” and claiming that “vodka, fresh air and hockey, tractors in the countryside will cure it all.” This active encouragement to “not be suffocated by face masks” and keeping healthy by “exercising or working in the field in the open air” could be frequently heard in the media. Keeping quite regular violations of constitutional rights in mind, it is slightly amusing to witness how Lukashenko did not want to put Belarusians “into cages”, pointing to the freedom provided, in contrast to limitations and regulations introduced by the rest of the world. ‣ The very first deaths from the virus were not framed as war casualties, but as people who are themselves fully responsible for their deaths by “foolishly deciding to go outside”. For instance, commenting on the death of a famous Belarusian actor, Lukashenko claimed that nobody should be too surprised since “what a 75-year-old man is doing outside?” and, besides, he was already “weak and had a bunch of health problems”. The denial of the existence of the coronavirus or the underestimation of its lethality was ever-present. People were said to die from conditions associated with smoking or being overweight, almost arranging people in a hierarchy of who deserves and does not deserve to be affected by the coronavirus. People in critical
