Introduction:

Since 1995 Pontis Foundation (formerly Slovak Foundation for Civil Society/NOS) has established itself as a prominent NGO committed to election-related programs not only in Slovakia but also throughout the Central and Eastern European (CEE) region. From the beginning Pontis's vision has been focused on experience exchange activities, trying to build a regional platform for exchange and cooperation, rather than building bi-lateral relations within the region as was the vision since the very beginning. Most of Pontis's programs work in co-operation with local NGOs. Most notably, Rock Volieb ’98, O.K. ’98 campaign (Slovakia), Rock Volieb Export (Croatia, Ukraine), Partnership for Democracy (Serbia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Belarus) and the Slovak Democratic Initiative for South-Eastern Europe (FRY). These projects have served to strengthen NGO’s network of cooperating organizations and overall impact throughout the CEE region.

Pontis's goal in Belarus was to help indigenous non-governmental organizations of Belarus to increase citizen participation in democratic decision-making processes, in hopes of creating a critical mass of informed citizens better able voice their concerns to the government. Pontis has worked with NGOs from Belarus – mainly youth-related organization and youth activists (f.e. the Youth Coalition Changes, Zubr and regional branches) - which are carrying out democracy-building and advocacy activities in specific project areas that are feasible and significant, considering both the current political and economic situations in the country and the existing capacities within non-profit sector there. Pontis has provided assistance to the Belorussian organizations with their efforts to implement GOTV campaign first time in the history of political campaigning in Belarus. In addition, Pontis has involved other organizations from CEE – mainly Serbian NGOs (Otpor!) - to try to strengthen the capacity of the Belorussian organization.

Regional Exchange/Lessons Learned:

The 2001 Belarus campaign has increased the turnout of the voters, however the opposition was not able to benefit from it. The intention of this paper is not to cover and analyze the known factors of the results of the elections such as the candidate selection, the impact of weak partisan sector and the lack of cooperative agreement among political parties. More intend to frame some of the aspects of the interaction of regional exchange program, especially those who focus on engagement of the youth into public affairs and elections in general.

Belarus in 2001 and the development of the strategies was affected by the similar projects and situation in Yugoslavia, when political parties together with NGOs were able to increase the turnout and keep the election procedure reasonable free and fair. The difference between Belarus and Serbia was not the political structure and political situation as such, more on the existing structure of political parties and NGOs. In Serbia, there were a well-developed and structured NGOs, while in Belarus in 2001 the NGOs were more or less were looking for agenda and tools how the address the situation of the country. It seemed there was less understanding from the recipient’s side of regional exchange and what partner organizations can do for them. Since the very beginning of our work we can witness a certain “waiting for the magic tool” from our partners instead of understanding regional exchange as an addition to their plans. Some of the involved foreign experts consider – mainly the US – technical assistance before the presidential election in 20001 as too direct involvement into the planning of the opposition and in some extent to NGOs activities as well. On the other side there are arguments that the opposition and NGOs were waiting for strategic planning and/or decision from the foreign partners and in some extent there were a clear misunderstanding about the exact role of regional exchange projects as such. Lessons learned need to be drawn at the future planning of regional exchange program as well technical assistance programs.

One of the lessons learned is that regional exchange type of the projects are relevant even in the case the political situation are different, however the need and offer as well as the roles of the partner organizations have to be clarified at the beginning.

· Building of Formal (Youth) Structure

The organizations, which targeted youth during a political campaign (including youth coalition Changes and Zubr) was less successful in expanding their activist network toward the rural areas. One of the reasons of this could be that the youth activists had more focus on the candidate debate and was less focus on the particular non-partisan messages and door-to-door activities. Problematic was the lack of independence of zouth organiyation either by political parties or their “elderly” organizations (Zubr-Charter 97 relations). Another factor can be the formal character of the youth organizations, which could be less attractive for the youth people living in a formalized, soviet-type society. Formal structure was probably less flexible and this could be additional reason of the lack of engagements of young people.

During the regional exchange more attention should be focused on the early steps of fighting against such regimes. Both in Slovakia and Serbia the youth organization were highly informal. Otpor! has been started it’s activities more than two years ago as a protest against firing few professors at the Belgrade University, while also two years before the Slovak elections in `98 study groups “Overflow” and “Odbojova mladez” made the first anti-Meciar activities in 1997. The Slovak groups were not highly successful, there were lots of criticism against their graffiti’s and stickers by the older generation (remember Zubr). However their activities happened to identify and collect active students, who were able to participate in larger project in 1998 and provide useful experience of the reaction of the society for youth activism.

· Coordination of the training/Timing and Issues

There was lack of coordination among the organizations providing training and other assistance for youth. In many cases the organizations seemed over trained, same groups and individuals received different trainings, seemed in many cases fighting with too many information and tasks to be implemented and in the end failed to implement the training components. Due to the lack of time seems there was lack of coordination among different organization working on this field as well among donor organizations.

· Lack of focus on implementation/Lack of follow up

There was lack of effective follow up and implementation on regional exchange programs due to different reasons. First, the limited access to the country by program people (visa obligation, administration problems, lack of information on the implementation by partner organizations in Belarus). In addition there were lack of sufficient field information on implementation or the provided information did not cover the situation well.

· International/Regional Experience (Study Trips)

One of best capacity/building experience was the mission of young Slovak NGO activists to the election observation and supervisor’s mission of OSCE to Bosnia. The Slovak young activists were trained directly in the field. Through mission between 1996-98 there has been trained as much as 150 activists who were stand at the most successful election related projects of Slovakia in 1998. At the last time Pontis Foundation organized a group of 120 supervisors from Slovakia for OSCE to supervise the Parliamentary Election in Kosovo, on November 17, 2001. Additionally Pontis managed to include 8 Belarussians into the group.

Future Possible Focus:

In general we see two ways to strengthen of future regional exchange projects toward Belarus: the focus on implementation on the know-how and experience through short-time internships and study tours to CEE and Balkan countries including more individual approach on human resources development as well as to focus on post-election development of a new, young political and economical elite.

Based on the past experience in Belarus, the Institute for Civic Diplomacy at the Pontis Foundation is proposing the following frame for regional exchange for Belarus:

· Direct Issue-based Assistance

Assistance toward strategic planning, issue based organizational preparation, individual and organizational study trips and internships, strategic planning, implementation and evaluation. During field consultation focus on implementation and further recommendation for the local organizations as well donors community.

· Study trips and internships in the region

Trough study trip focus on implementation and know-how building as well as to start the preparation for the post-election and post-Luka period. Organize various form of study trips and internships in different countries, coordination and oversees necessary from donors community.

· Strengthened coordination and cooperation among donors and TA providers toward Belarus

· Informal network building of youth at universities

Building informal, more issue-based networks directly at universities, maintain independent regional networks.

· Strengthening awareness and building solidarity at regional/neighboring countries of Belarus

Strengthened the awareness in the neighboring and regional countries about the regime and increase solidarity of these countries with the people of Belarus. New media activities and public events in CEE countries can increase solidarity and flow of information about the democratic forces of Belarus. If possible, several Belarussian NGO activists can be invited to give lectures, interviews etc. Goals are twofold:

a) to show them they are not alone