Mikalai Khalezin: “Wave against repressions to surge up”

The directorship of the Belarus Free Theatre Natalya Kalyada and Mikalai Khalezin have visited the capital of the US, where they held additional consultations in the US Department of State, the Congress, the UN bodies and with a number of ambassadors of the European Union countries accredited in the US.

We are discussing the results of the visit with the art director of the theatre Mikalai Khalezin.

- It is not your first visit to Washington over the last days. What was its aim this time?

- Two weeks ago Natalya, together with Iryna Krasouskaya, met with the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and representatives of a number of US Senators. This time new consultations were needed, and we went to Washington on their invitation, in order to offer new information and express our opinion on the recent developments.

- What meetings have taken place this time and what were the main topics for discussion?

- Consultations with the office of the Secretary of State, a meeting with representatives of Senators Kerry, Lieberman, Biden, a conversation with the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture. The key topics were the situation with political prisoners in Belarus, effectiveness of economic sanctions, elements of comprehensive strategy of pressure on Lukashenka’s regime. We have not departed from the earlier discussed subjects. A topic of ice hockey, seemingly paradoxical in this context, could only be called a new aspect in the consultations.

- To your mind, could hockey be a method of pressure on the dictatorship?

- Everything which washes out the foundations of the dictatorship could be related to the pressure on the dictatorship.

- What kind of pressure on the dictatorship could be exerted in the sphere of sports?

- There could be different methods. On the one hand, pressure of society on sports federation with the aim of boycotting international events held in Belarus. Among the most remarkable events of this kind is the Ice Hockey World Championship 2014, which is planned to be held in our country. If some efforts are concentrated in this direction, the championship could be transferred to a different country, or none of self-respecting sportsmen would take part in it.

- Are you building on your experience of creating the Global Artistic Campaign of Solidarity with Belarus?

- It is easier to build on one’s own positive experience. We have managed to obtain results in this field, which would be unlikely in the countries where democratic transformations have taken place just recently. One could object that transformations have taken place there, while transformations have not taken place in this country, however our situation is by far more difficult, so we should go to much greater lengths to make changes. We have managed to receive support from such international stars as Tom Stoppard, Mick Jagger, Steven Spielberg, Alan Rickmen, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Kevin Spacey, Mikhail Baryshnikov, Tony Kushner, Jude Law, dozens of international theatre and cinema stars. I can tell these names for a very long time. Yesterday one more cinema personality, Michael Douglas, joined the campaign. He has sent us a letter of support, where he writes in particular that some of his ancestors are from Belarus. Today the Global Campaign of Artistic Solidarity with Belarus is managed by us, but is spinning out of control, in the finest sense of this word. Yesterday Tom Stoppard told us that one of the petitions distributed by us had been signed by George Clooney, and we knew nothing about that.

This campaign is a powerful lever when politicians take decisions – we are told about that at almost every political meeting. And it is not surprising – in the politics creative professionals are guided by ethics and their principles, and have much greater influence and support in the society than politicians.

- What was your position on imposing sanctions, which had been articulated by you in Washington?

- We do not conceal our position – it is not changing. We are in favour of imposing the harshest sanctions against Lukashenka and his family members. At the same time, our principled position remains the assurance that before release of political prisoners no talks could be held and no official contacts maintained with Lukashenka’s administration. Americans understand that very well, as in their struggle against crime they are guided by the principle “no negotiations with terrorists.” Lukashenka has declared himself to be an outlaw by unleashing terror against his nation, and so he must understand perfectly well that there would be an adequate response to his actions.

- Does the US leadership stays informed about the Belarusian developments?

- To our mind, they are informed as never before. During our meeting in the office of the Secretary of State, which took place at 10 a.m., we were told that this morning, long before our arrival, Hillary Clinton once again requested fresh information on Belarus. But I am glad that this involvement is transforming from a political sphere into the sphere of human relations.

When we concluded conversation and went out into the hall of the advisor of the Secretary of State, we saw one of the superiors of the US State Department, who was patiently waiting for the end of our conversation. We greeted each other, and he passed us a package with a baseball bat and two balls. He said: “Please present this to Stepan from us.” During the previous meeting Natalya recalled the death of Aleh Byabenin and told in passing that Aleh had asked us to bring from US baseball bat and a ball for his 5-year-old son Stepan. Representatives of the US State Department remembered this story and prepared such a gift to Stepan by our next visit. It is more important than any political lobbyism, when people view your children not as abstract “population”, but as real people. By thinking about Stepan when passing a resolution, they would be able to weigh up every their action, every step.

- You have probably heard such reproaches many times: “Who are you to act as the voice of the whole country”?

- We are hearing such reproaches only from some our fellow countrymen, and almost never outside Belarus. In the US in general it is not expected to discuss your profession in the context of the public life. There are simple criteria here: if you set forth a clear well-grounded position, based upon a priority of moral values, and if you are influential in your profession, people at all levels will talk to you, and attentively listen to what you are saying. We are not really concerned about why they listen to us – it is important for us to be listened to. We are strong, that is why we are able to communicate our point of view. In Britain and in the US it looks strange when a well-known actor or filmmaker has not taken a definite stand on political matters. They believe that when you are a famous person, in the public eye, in the full glare of publicity, you should have some mission in the society.

- Are there any complications during your contacts with American and European politicians?

- I cannot say that there are any complications in the contacts with them, rather we have some problems in mutual understanding with some people who do parallel work to release political prisoners. Suddenly initiatives emerged, which have only one name of one political prisoner – “Freedom to Nyaklyaeu!”, “Freedom to Statkevich!” We are categorically against such approach, as long as we call for morality politicians at all levels, why should we be inconsistent ourselves. It split the ranks not only those who are doing their best to liberate political prisoners, but also create serious tensions between families of those who are imprisoned in the KGB prison. I am a member of the initiative group of Andrei Sannikov, but two days ago at an evening in New York PEN Center, I stood on the stage with the portrait of Uladzimir Nyaklyaeu and read his poems, together with an American actor Michael Laurence. And portraits of Mikalai Statkevich, Zmitser Bandarenka, Ales Mikhalevich stood beside… It is immoral to fight for release of one person, while there are thirty political prisoners in custody. It is also immoral for Amnesty International to recognize some people arrested on the square prisoners of conscience, and not to recognize others arrested in the same place.

- Taking stock of the month after the election, what have you accomplished over this period of time?

- We have managed to launch a global campaign of solidarity with Belarus in many countries of the world with the help of a huge number of our friends in Britain and the US. We have turned the tide in the US mass media, and we succeeded in making them cover the Belarusian issues almost every day. And notably, this concerns major US newspapers, for which the word Belarus became an absolutely new one in their lexicon.

All those who were engaged in dissemination of information, signed petitions, lobbied interests of Belarusians in the political sphere of the US and Europe, managed to achieve two important political decisions: consultations on Belarus between the US and Russian governments have started, and extraordinary hearings in the US Congress are to be held in the near future, as we hope. I would call the unyielding US stand on Belarus one more moment important for Belarus, as to a large extent it has determined a harsh position of Europe towards the Belarusian dictatorship. The work of the US lobbyists was very important for that, and to their credit they have demonstrated their adherence to the idea of human rights, having ignored “geo-political interests” and “economic expediency” which have become the fancy of so many politicians in Europe recently.

Unfortunately, today is not the right time to tell the names of those who are changing the attitude to Belarus by their actions and their example. Actions of some members of the Belarusian expat community in the US and of Iryna Krasouskaya, a president of “We Remember” foundation personally, could be called invaluable in this context.

- To your mind, will the US-Russia consultations contribute to resolving the situation?

- In this situation the only question is whether a logical and consistent partner at the Western border is advantageous for Russia. Today for the first time a situation is when the US and the European Union could do without Russia in liquidation of the dictatorship in Belarus. But we believe that consultations of these three subjects could hasten the process considerably. Russia has got used to shaping the fate of the Belarusian nation single-handedly. President Medvedev should understand that the situation is changing dynamically. Since now Russia is finding itself in a competitive environment – in case it won’t help to overturn the dictatorship in Belarus, it would be done without them. What is happening now is not the final of the process, but a beginning, “the Belarusian wave” is just starting to surge up. And its growth has already outlined a logical final, a final of the career of the last dictator of Europe.