The Center for European Transformation (CET) prepared an analytical document (in Russian) based on the results of the study of system of donor aid in Belarus and the place of civil society in it.

The authors of the research — an analyst of the CET Alena Zuikova and the head of the CET Andrei Yahorau — note that “the monitoring of external aid with a view to development is required in Belarus in order to provide openness of this process as well as to expand the possibilities of public control over the distribution of donor aid.”

Over the last years many Belarusan experts, state officials, and politicians often speculate in donor aid given to Belarus. State bodies and top-ranking officials are trying to present the situation so that the entire external aid received from foreign states and international structures is directed exclusively to “support civil society and democratization in the country.” Members of political opposition blame each other for non-target expenses of foreign aid and call for monitoring of the allocated funds. The representatives of the NGOs note low transparency of large NGO-state cooperation projects and low involvement of the civil society into realization of donor aid programs for Belarus. Politically active part of internet-users in the social networks and forums criticizes public and political forces for pointless waste of grants. “Usually, these speculations are based on real facts and reflect personal experience when facing certain aspects in realization of grant projects or the work of public and political organizations. To make well-founded judgments we need to rely on concrete facts and real data, which is why this research was made,” emphasize the authors of the document.

The research presents general overview of external aid to Belarus from 2006 till 2012 with an emphasis on civil society funding, as well as the place of the EU and its countries-members in the general system of donor aid. To study the figures, tables, and diagrams, please download the document.

The research marks that the pool of donors that are very significant in Belarus is limited, with Sweden, EU institutions, Poland, Germany, and the US occupying the first places in 2012. However, Belarus is not the priority partner for its main donors.

The results of the research show that the role of the civil society as a channel of aid distribution is growing in Belarus. However, state structures still prevail, with the civil society only getting 20 per cent of the donor aid to Belarus on the whole.

According to Andrei Yahorau, “non-coordination of donor strategy” observed throughout 2006-2012 leads to such phenomenon as “division of the civil society”; besides, emphasis on social projects rather aims at preservation of the current system’s stability rather than initiates systematic changes in the country.

“The main problem is in the structure of aid that Belarusan civil society receives,” said Andrei Yahorau in the interview with the EuroBelarus Information Service. “Donors organize this aid very differently; and this unbalance of actions leads to a certain chaos and disorganizes those who use this aid. Actions of donors are rather working for system’s stabilization than for changes in the country.”

According to Andrei Yahorau, “today the system of international aid is a serious mechanism made from numerous elements that include private and public foundations, civil society structures that reallocate this money; those, who direct this money, international institutions that work with this money, and recipients of this money in Belarus themselves, which are also diverse both in type and in their aims.”

“And that creates a divaricate system without any common goal, but only the goal of allocating money for development, which can be very different. Multi-strategic and multidirectional activity doesn’t lead to general changes in the system; it creates many small social goods and services for the Belarusan society. On the whole this isn’t bad, but it doesn’t lead to changes. We can even presume that such system of aid stabilizes the existing political regimes.”

As to the danger of dividing civil society due to differences in approaches and strategies that donors use, Andrei Yahorau assumes that “in our country this division will show itself even more than in Ukraine.”

“Unlike Ukrainian situation, Belarus doesn’t have any money that would be spent of funding state sector and political activity. That makes our dependence on external funding even stronger, and that means that the effect of division will be stronger, too. However, we can’t say that aid system doesn’t do any good; it brings a lot of use, but rather in social and infrastructure channel that works for the state system, by this stabilizing it.”