Following the recent reanimation of shaping the post-Soviet collective defense system by Russia, the issue of sending Belarusian troops to operations outside Belarus has been repeatedly addressed. Since the beginning of the discussions on Belarus’ (non-) participation in the Collective Rapid Reaction Forces of the Collective Defense Treaty Organization (CQRF CDTO), the public has come to believe that it is not possible by law for Belarusian troops to take part in foreign operations. For example, the MFA press-secretary Andrei Papou stated when talking to media: “As soon as the Belarusian troops’ involvement in some ‘hot spots’ is considered, naturally, it is prohibited by the Belarusian law. It has never happened and is not going to happen”[1]. Is it really true?

So far, the Belarusian law does not contain a plain ban on Belarusian military engagement in operations abroad. Contrary to the popular opinion, the Constitution of Belarus provides no such a prohibition, as the armed forces are mentioned in it only twice[2] in a totally different context, while the military personnel is mentioned only once, in the context of ban on membership in political parties[3]. The Armed Forces Law of the Republic of Belarus has no such a provision either, only stating that “sending troops abroad for the purpose of fulfilling the international obligations of the state, engagement in warfare or peace-keeping operations shall only proceed in accordance with the law and international treaties of the Republic of Belarus”[4].

Regarding the CDTO agreements, they are also far from plainly forbidding the participation of the Belarusian troops throughout the CDTO territory. Yet, the Agreement on the Status of Force Generation and Collective Defense System Instruments, dated 11 October 2000, contains a reservation by Belarus, stressing that “sending the Armed Forces or any other troops of Belarus to the territory of other Collective Defense Treaty member states, as well as deploying or adopting the armed forces of other states on the territory of Belarus, is only allowable if sanctioned by the National Assembly of the Republic of Belarus”[5]. This reservation is signed by the Vice-Prime Minister Mr Latypau, the State Secretary of the Security Council Mr Sheiman and the ex-Minister of Defense Mr Chumakou.

In November 2003, the Parliament passed the Law on the Procedures of Sending Troops, Senior and Rank Personnel of the Interior Institutions, Financial Investigation Institutions of the State Control Committee of Belarus, Emergency Institutions and Sub-Units, Prosecutor’s Office Personnel, and the Civilian Staff outside Belarus to Support the International Peace and Security (Nr 254-3). The Article 2 of the Law contains a definition of the activities for maintaining international peace and security: “operations for maintaining peace and other measures by the UN Security Council in accordance with the UN Charter, by regional international organizations or in the framework of the regional international organizations or agreements of Belarus, or sanctioned by bilateral or multilateral international treaties of Belarus, if they are not considered as coercive actions by the UN Charter”, as well as “international coercive military actions based on the decision of the UN Security Council, passed in accordance with the UN Charter in order to eliminate a threat to peace, violations of peace or an act of aggression”. In other words, this law enables Belarusian troops to participate in any peacekeeping and peacemaking operations (military operation) sanctioned by the UN Security Council.

Interestingly, the law refers to the definition of coercive actions by the UN Charter, though the Charter does not contain a specific definition of the “coercive action”. It is also worthwhile noting that, contrary to the above-mentioned reservation to the Agreement on the Status of Force Generation and Collective Defense System Instruments, the Law on the Procedures of Sending Troops entitles the President rather than the National Assembly of Belarus to make a decision about sending military personnel outside the country (Article 5).

However, the UN Charter, to which the law refers, does not regulate a right to individual or collective self-defense[6]. Meanwhile, according to the Article 4 of the Collective Defense Treaty (CDT), Belarus must provide a victim of foreign aggression with “necessary support, including military one”[7]. Nevertheless, the Article 10 of the Law Nr 254-3 abolishes the old Law on Sending Troops, Interior and Prosecutor’s Office Personnel outside Belarus for Fulfilling International Obligations of the State, Participation in Military Actions and Peace-Keeping Operations dated by 1996[8]. Logically, the new Law does not contain terms of “military actions” and “international obligations” anymore, while a separate law for regulating engagement in foreign military actions still does not exist.

So, the situation is as follows: there is no any clear legal ban on Belarusian troops’ participation in military actions abroad (we do not mean a response to an armed attack against Belarus, since in this case other norms come into force); however, it is also true that the country has no legal act which would exhaustively regulate the involvement of Belarusian military in fighting operations and the fulfillment of international obligations of Belarus in the framework of defense alliances.

It is clear now that the legislative gaps leave a large space for a political maneuver. Once there is a sufficient political will, the President of Belarus is entitled to send troops to foreign operations “to maintain international peace and security”. At the same time, “maintaining peace” is a term of very wide comprehension; moreover, we have a lot of precedents of very liberal treatment of “peace-keeping” and “maintaining international security” in today’s international relations (e.g. Russian operation in South Ossetia or the US-led coalition’s war on Iraq). Vice versa, if the political will is missing or the decision is unpopular, one can always refer to the lack of legal regulation, something exactly what we witnessed during the last year’s row on the membership of Belarus in the CQRF CDTO.

It is worth mentioning that this situation is first of all negative for the Russian-Belarusian ties, since it adversely affects the fulfillment of CDTO allied commitments by Belarus, potentially blocking the Belarusian military from involvement in coercive operations, e.g. against the post-Soviet “democratic revolutions”. At the same time, the law does not prevent Belarus from participation in military operations sanctioned by the UN Security Council, e.g. in Afghanistan, or EU operations in Africa. Participation of Belarusian troops in such missions should be considered potentially positive both for increasing the competence and operational efficiency of the Armed Forced of Belarus and for improving the international image of the state in terms of developing ties with the US and EU.

[1] http://www.mfa.gov.by/ru/press/news/c86454034ec9e91f.html

[2] Art. 84.

[3] Art. 36.

[4] Закон Республики Беларусь от 3 ноября 1992 года «О Вооруженных Силах Республики Беларусь» (Ведамасці Вярхоўнага Савета Рэспублікі Беларусь, 1992 г., № 28, ст. 495; 1996 г., № 29, ст. 531; Национальный реестр правовых актов Республики Беларусь, 1999 г., № 89, 2/82). Артыкул 12.

[5] http://spravka-jurist.com/base/part-qx/tx_cszpfu.htm

[6] UN Charter, Article 51.

[7] The Collective Security Treaty (http://www.dkb.gov.ru/start/index.htm)

[8] Ведамасці Вярхоўнага Савета Рэспублікі Беларусь, 1996 г., № 23, ст. 429.

Впервые опубликовано Наша нiва