Even a few weeks ago, when the word "mobilization" sounded like one of the not very likely options in the analysts' thinking, the most frequent prediction was that if Putin starts taking civilians to the war instead of contractors, Russia will rise.

After all, this will lead to a completely different scale of victims (they meant, of course, victims not from the Ukrainian side).

And the sea of ​​maternal tears will wash away Putin's regime.

The mobilization has only been going on for a few days, and it is difficult to predict how it might end in a military sense.

Some say that the demobilized will be thrown into battle as cannon fodder.

The second - that they will replace the soldiers in the rear, and they will be transferred to the war.

What I am sure of is that maternal tears will not have any serious effect on the Kremlin.

Just as the tears of relatives of the repressed did not soften Lukashenka (perhaps, on the contrary).

I am reminded of the court case against Svetlana Aleksievich

in the early 1990s

, when she was sued by the participants in the war in Afghanistan and the mothers of the dead, based on the material of the conversations with which she wrote "Zinc Boys".

The reason for the lawsuit is that the writer allegedly distorted their words and did not show the military as heroes.

If we simplify the plot as much as possible and consider it not from a literary and legal perspective, but from a political perspective, the situation today can be seen from a distance as follows.

At a time when society began to realize that the USSR's "international aid" to Afghanistan was aggression, and the Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan were accomplices or even participants in mass murder, including the civilian population, a work appeared, translated into many languages ​​of the world, in which these soldiers and officers shown by the victims.

Victims of the criminal decision of the initiators of aggression.

Ruthless, as the world community imagined them, the Soviet soldiers doubted, repented, and even cried...

But mothers did not want their sons to look humanized - they needed heroes.

Here is just one fragment from the transcript of the pre-trial interview with Ekaterina Platytsyna, the mother of the deceased Major Alexander Platytsyn (I am providing it in the original language):


Platytsina (takes the book in her hands): Everything is not as I said.

My son was not like that.

He loved his country.

(Crying.) ... He was an officer.

Military officer.

And here he is shown as a crybaby.

Was it necessary to write about it?... You see, he was a military officer.

He could not cry.

S. Aleksievich: When I wrote your story, I also cried.

And I hated those who sent your son to die in a foreign country for nothing.

And we were then with you together, at the same time.

E. Platitsina: You say that I should hate the state, the party... And I am proud of my son!

He died as a combat officer.

All his friends loved him.

I love the state in which we lived, the USSR, because my son died for it.

And I hate you!

I don't need your terrible truth.

We don't need her!

Do you hear?!"

I had the opportunity to see the eyes of the mother of the deceased "Afghan" at one of these processes.

I don't know if it is the one whose words are quoted.

I will not describe my impression, she lost her son, it is a huge grief, grief for the rest of her life.

But next to her stood people who, as it is now customary to say, "provided political and legal support."

And they had cunning eyes.

I had the opportunity to see those who were the "political engine" of this "truth trial", as the writers called the process in their letter - World War II veterans Mykola Avramchyk, Vasil Bykau, Aleksandar Drakakhrust, Naum Kislik, Valyantyn Taras.

The plaintiffs were assisted by the Afghanistan Veterans Union, but the driving belts stretched higher - to the Committee under the Council of Ministers for Social Protection of the Military, Members of the Rank and Management Staff of Internal Affairs Bodies, Internationalist Soldiers, Retired and Their Family Members.

That was the long name of the structure headed by

Siarhei Haidukevich


At the same time, he led the "People's Movement of Belarus" created as an alternative to the BNF, which included the Union of Officers, the Slavic Council "Belaya Rus" and other anti-independence pro-Russian organizations.

Haidukevich's immediate superior was

Genadz Danilov , the State Secretary for Defense Affairs and Prime Minister

Vyacheslav Kebich

's "right-hand man"


But what a coincidence - it was at this very time that the pro-imperial forces started the process of joining Belarus to the system of Collective Security of the CIS (CSTO), which actually meant bringing the country into the orbit of the military interests of the Moscow General Staff.

I will not dwell on this topic, I write about it in detail in the book "Ninety-three", I will only note that Danilov led the procedure, campaigned on television and radio.

Well, the issue of the CSTO was brought to the agenda of the Supreme Council session by the deputy from the 310th Shklov constituency, the director of the Horadets state farm, Lukashenka (isn't it true - a somewhat unexpected topic for an agrarian?).

The result was predictable: despite the opposition of BNF opposition deputies, the parliamentary majority voted for joining the CSTO.

Well, we can see the global result now, when Moscow uses the territory of Belarus as a launching pad against Ukraine.

Of course, I'm not going to claim that already in 1993, aggression against Ukraine with the annexation of its territories was being developed in detail - but the desire for imperial revenge in Moscow became more and more clear and manifested itself at higher and higher levels.

In Minsk, the flag of the restoration of the "one and indestructible" was raised by the same director of the state farm "Horadets", who in August 1993 gave an interview to the Moscow "Pravda" under the title "To be revived!"

— receiving in return an article from Vasyl Bykov, whose title contained the word "devil".

Undoubtedly, the tears of the mothers of those who died in Afghanistan at the trial of Aleksievich were as sincere as their tears over the zinc coffins of their sons.

But in both cases, they were the result of militaristic, essentially, imperial interests of cynical politicians with epaulettes.

Such politicians with epaulettes are at the top of power in both Moscow and Minsk.

And it's not the first decade.

At the trial in 1993, Svetlana Aleksievich remarked: "It is impossible to take away this most beloved... most expensive toy - war - from a man with impunity.

This myth... This ancient instinct...".

Now, it seems to me, these words can be questioned - the gender difference is blurring more and more.

It is not the first year that we see all these "immortal sticks", concerts with dance numbers of girls in military uniforms, we see how women dress their children in military uniforms and even hang combat medals on them, sit on bicycles decorated in the form of tanks and combat planes .

We also see selfies of women against the background of armored personnel carriers and even missile systems.

There is less of this in Belarus (so far), but in many schools it is considered mandatory to take children on an excursion to the "Stalin Line", where they can see and even touch real military equipment.

All this contributes to the awareness of war not as a concentration of millions of tragedies, but as something everyday.

Which, indeed, can be easily and carelessly repeated.

Moscow, May 9, 2020

...Today I saw several videos from Russia on Telegram channels.

On one is the entrance of a town house, the guy puts his foot on the step, and his friend jumps on the foot from above, with all his weight.

A wild cry, Motherland, but - there is, a fracture!

So, mobilization will be avoided!

In the second, taken, as it seems, in the same Russian village, the guy hits his friend's hand with all his might with a hammer.

But, obviously, it hits only the soft tissues, not the bone - there is a mole, but there is no fracture.

"Can we repeat"?

And on the third, from the Military Commissariat in some Russian town, buses with conscripts leave.

A military band is playing, women are waving and crying.

But the orchestra plays much louder than the crying.

The opinions expressed in the blogs represent the views of the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position.

  • Siarhei Naumchyk

    Siarhei Naumchyk was born in 1961 in Postavy.

    He graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of BSU, served in the army, worked in the Vitebsk regional newspaper.

    He was a deputy of the Supreme Soviet of Belarus and the coordinator of the BNF parliamentary opposition.

    In 1996, he received political asylum in the USA.