On the Borders of the Belarusian People's Republic

Tatiana Yakauleuna Pavlova — PhD student at the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus

Throughout the modern history of Belarus, the question of its ethnic and state borders has repeatedly arisen. The theoretical development of this issue at the beginning of the century was undertaken by Professor E. F. Karsky, who later became a participant in the Belarusian national movement, a delegate and honorary chairman of the All-Belarusian Congress in December 1917, and the author of major scientific works in linguistics, philology, and ethnography. He was the first to delineate the ethnic borders and compile an ethnographic map of Belarus. In his work “Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe” (1903), Professor Karsky detailed the ethnic territory of Belarus: the area where Belarusians constitute an absolute or relative majority. This area, according to E. F. Karsky’s work, was located on both sides of the Baltic-Black Sea watershed in the basins of the upper Dnieper, upper Neman, and upper and middle Western Dvina; it included not only the current territory of the republic but also some regions of Bryansk, Smolensk, and Pskov provinces (1). In the west, Professor Karsky included Vilna and most of Bialystok province as part of Belarus; in the northwest — the districts of Dvinsk, Lucin, and Rezhitsky of Livonia province (Latgale).

When, under the influence of the revolutionary events of 1917, the question of Belarus’s self-determination arose, the problem of ethnic, and later state borders, became one of the most important. The February Revolution marked a turning point in the development of the national movement in Belarus in general and the idea of national statehood in particular. However, initially, there was no unity among the figures of the national movement regarding the issue of national statehood.

Representatives of the liberal orientation believed that it was necessary to strive for national-state autonomy for Belarus within the Russian Federative Republic. The parties and organizations of the liberals considered that Belarus was not a national region, but merely an area with its own ethnic-cultural characteristics.

The demand for autonomy for Belarus within the Russian Federative Republic was fundamental in the programs of democratic parties. The program of the most influential democratic party — the Belarusian Socialist Hramada — asserted the demand for complete self-governance for Belarus with its legislative body, the Regional Council (2). Belarusian organizations demanded recognition of autonomy from the Provisional Government of Russia, but it clearly did not wish to grant the peoples of the former empire real national freedom. In September 1917, at the Congress of Nations in Kyiv, which included Belarusian delegates, a resolution “About Belarusians” was adopted, appealing to the Provisional Government for the immediate issuance of a decree on the autonomy of Belarus in the Russian Federative Republic within the ethnographic borders of the settlement of the Belarusian people, including the territories seized by Germany (3). The Bolsheviks, who took power in Russia in October 1917, instrumentally related to their own programmatic thesis “on the right of nations to self-determination up to separation and the creation of independent states.” This right was subordinated to “revolutionary expediency.” Belarus was long viewed as Western Russia, and only territorial autonomy was envisaged for it. Therefore, the question of the borders of Belarus — the Northwestern region — was not of fundamental importance to the Bolsheviks.

In early December 1917, the leadership of national-democratic organizations decided to hold an All-Belarusian Congress, where the fate of Belarusian statehood was to be decided. The Congress began its work on December 14, but on December 18, by the decision of the Soviet of People’s Commissars of the Western region and the front, it was dispersed. The executive committee of the Congress, which operated illegally, managed to send its delegation to peace negotiations in Brest-Litovsk to defend the rights of Belarus during the signing of the peace treaty, which was one of the first attempts to uphold the indivisibility of Belarus as a historically established territorial-ethnic unit. As a result of the Brest Peace Treaty (March 3, 1918), concluded by Soviet Russia with the Quadruple Alliance, most of Belarus remained under German occupation. According to this treaty, Belarus was effectively divided into three parts. The western part — Grodno province and part of Vilna with Vilna — was ceded to Germany and received the name New East Prussia; the population of these territories became citizens of the German Empire. The central part of Belarus — Minsk province, part of Vitebsk and Mogilev provinces — was considered temporarily occupied territory. Article III of the Brest Peace Treaty stated that the future of these areas would be determined by Germany and Austria-Hungary in relation to their population (4). Belarusian Podlasie — Biała, Janów, Terespol, Koden, Konstantynów, Niemirów, Mezhrichye; Brest region — Brest, Kobrin, Pruzhany counties; Polesie — Dragichin, Kosov, Luninets, Pinsk, Stolin, Mozyr, Rechitsa, Gomel counties were recognized by Germany as belonging to Ukraine (5). Only the most eastern regions of Belarus remained within the RSFSR.

On February 19, 1918, German troops entered the unoccupied territory of Belarus. In this situation, the Executive Committee of the I All-Belarusian Congress addressed the people with the I Statutory Charter, declaring itself the temporary authority in Belarus. A government was formed — the People’s Secretariat. On March 9, 1918, the Executive Committee of the Congress adopted the II Statutory Charter, proclaiming the Belarusian People’s Republic. The legislative body was declared to be the Council of the All-Belarusian Congress, and the executive body was the People’s Secretariat, appointed by the Council and accountable to it. Some figures of the Belarusian national movement, declaring the formation of an independent Belarusian state in February 1918, considered it possible to enter the RSFSR on the rights of autonomy, but after the conclusion of the Brest Peace, this became meaningless. The decision on independence was formalized in the III Statutory Charter of March 25, 1918, which declared the BPR “an independent and free state.” The III Statutory Charter of the Council of the Belarusian People’s Republic also stated that the BPR should encompass all territories where the Belarusian population resides and predominates: Mogilev region, Belarusian parts of Minsk, Grodno (including Grodno, Bialystok, etc.), Vilna, Vitebsk, Smolensk, Chernigov, and border areas of neighboring provinces populated by Belarusians (6). The Council of the BPR declared the territory, but, of course, had no border demarcation with neighboring states or border service.

At the end of March 1918, at a meeting of the Council of the BPR, a Commission on International Affairs was created, tasked with working on the description of the borders of the republic. In May of the same year, a so-called Strategic Commission was established under the People’s Secretariat of Foreign Affairs, which worked on a detailed and accurate description of the borders of the Belarusian People’s Republic. Along with the Strategic Commission, a special commission under the People’s Secretariat of International Affairs operated. However, the extremely difficult external and internal political situation did not facilitate the work, and the commission’s progress was slow. The final version of the republic’s map, according to the decision of the BPR government, was to be based on the work of both commissions (the Strategic and the special one under the People’s Secretariat). Already in September 1918, it was planned to publish a map of the Belarusian People’s Republic in two versions: a regular one and in the form of a postage stamp (which was issued that same year).

The map was published only in 1919 in the Polish-occupied Grodno (the BPR government emigrated in December 1918). Archival funds also preserved a schematic description of the borders of Belarus, compiled by a group of members of the Council and the People’s Secretariat (which included such well-known figures of the Belarusian national movement as Ya. Voronko, V. Zakharco, A. Tsvikievich, Ya. Sereda). These borders practically coincide with the borders proposed by Professor E. F. Karsky in his work “Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe,” as well as with German maps that appeared in Minsk in March 1918 (7).

The Border with Great Russia (8).

It begins at the Korsovka station of the northwestern railway (Petrograd — Warsaw), approximately 40 versts north of the city of Rezhitsa, Vitebsk province. From this point, where the borders of Belarus, Great Russia, and Livonia converge, the border runs almost in a straight line to Velikiye Luki across the territory of Pskov province, capturing it in a strip of 10-15 versts and passing south of the cities of Opotchka and Velikiye Luki by 5 versts; bypassing Velikiye Luki, the border runs 5-10 versts south of the Velikiye Luki — Rzhev railway, then goes through the territory of Smolensk province, where it turns north, adhering to the border of this province; at the locality of Rozhnya, the border crosses into the territory of Tver province and, capturing it in a strip of 30-40 versts, heads towards Rzhev, where, 10 versts away, it sharply turns south, to the upper reaches of the Dnieper, from where it descends along the Dnieper to the intersection with the railway Smolensk — Vyazma, from where in a wide arc, bulging eastward, the border goes to the intersection of the Smolensk — Sukhinichi railway with the border of Kaluga province; further, both borders merge and stretch together to the river Desna, down which the border of Belarus descends to the station Gorodets, 25 versts northwest of Bryansk; at this point, the border turns directly south, merges again with the Desna River and, descending downstream for 80 versts, crosses the border of Ukraine, which coincides at this point with the eastern border of Chernigov province.

The most complex task for the figures of the BPR was to determine the border with Russia. They understood that the border in the east would be set in Moscow. The Smolensk and Bryansk lands at different historical stages were part of either the Grand Duchy of Lithuania or Moscow Russia, but almost all maps of the 19th to early 20th centuries already depicted the established border of ethnic Belarus covering Smolensk and the western regions of Bryansk province. Thus, in the “List of Settlements According to Data from 1859,” there is information about the predominance of Belarusians among the population of Smolensk province throughout the province, “especially Belarusians are widespread in the districts: Roslavl, Smolensk, Krasninsky, Dorogobuzh, Yelnya, Porechye, and Dukhovshchina.” Other Russian sources also testified that “half of the population of Smolensk province indeed belongs to the Belarusian tribe… and by their overall natural type, most of Smolensk province is no different from the most typical parts of Belarus, with which it has more in common than with neighboring provinces.”

The Border with Ukraine.

Beginning at the confluence of the Desna River with the border of Chernigov province, the border of Belarus descends along the Desna for 10 versts, turning west and cutting off the northern part of Chernigov province, heading towards the Dnieper River 30 versts below the confluence of the Sosh River, near the villages of Lyubech and Lushivo; along the Dnieper, the border reaches the meeting point with the border of Kyiv province, follows it, reaching the border of Volhynia province, goes along this border to (here opinions diverge: members of the BPR Council, relying on historical traditions and the sympathies of Poleshuks, undoubtedly more Belarusian than Ukrainian, tend to draw the border as it is drawn further in the text; Professor Karsky, German and Ukrainian specialists believe that the border of Belarus runs along the border of Volhynia province only to the village of Skorodnoye, from which it should rise straight north to the city of Mozyr in Minsk province, from Mozyr they lead it first along the Pripyat River, then along the tributary Bobrik, and then from its upper reaches to Lake Vygonovskoye, from which a broken line through the cities of Kartuz Bereza, Pruzhany and north of the cities of Kamieniec-Lithuanian, Vysoky-Lithuanian, heads towards the village of Melniki, which is the meeting point of the borders of Ukraine, Belarus, and Poland) the junction with the border of Grodno province and along the border of this province heads towards the city of Włodawa — the point of convergence of the borders of Belarus, Poland, and Ukraine.

The border with Ukraine, or as it was also called, the Polesie region, was characterized by a rather peaceful existence for many centuries and the absence of any military actions aimed at changing the border. During the times of Gediminas and his successors, the territory of modern Belarus and most of Ukraine were part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. For a long time, the border between Brest region and Volhynia was not precisely established. Before the signing of the Union of Lublin in 1569, the Polish Kingdom, taking advantage of the difficulties of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the Livonian War, annexed, with the consent of the local nobility, Volhynia, Kyiv voivodeship, Ukrainian and other lands. Thus, a new administrative-political border was established between Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, i.e., between Ukraine and Belarus. However, there were also ethnic and political problems here. E. Karsky, in compiling his map, used a strictly linguistic approach and resolved all disputed points not in favor of the Belarusian ethnicity. Thus, the southwestern regions (Polesie territories), where Ukrainian linguistic features predominated, were excluded from the ethnic territory of Belarus. The Belarusian historian and participant in the national movement M. V. Dovnar-Zapolsky created a new map, based on all the main factors — from linguistic to historical-ethnic. According to Dovnar-Zapolsky’s map, the southern border of Belarus runs almost as it exists today. However, it should be noted that in 1918, the leaders of the Ukrainian People’s Republic, using the complex external political situation, sought to expand the territory of their state at the expense of Belarus: they claimed Belarusian districts of Chernigov province, as well as parts of Mogilev, Minsk, and Grodno provinces. Historians are aware of a case when in June 1918, residents of Bikhov and Chausy districts protested against the annexation of Mogilev province to Ukraine (9).

The Border with Poland.

Beginning at the city of Włodawa, on the Bug River (according to German works — at the village of Melniki on the Bug River), the border follows down the Bug to its tributary Nurets, rises along the Nurets to Bryansk, where it turns to the city of Surazh (on the Narev River), descends along the Narev to the confluence of the Bobr River, rises along the Bobr to the Augustów Canal, goes along the canal and, not reaching the city of Augustów by 10 versts, turns towards Druskieniki (the northernmost point of Grodno province, located on the Neman River), where the borders of Belarus, Poland, and Lithuania converge.

The border with Poland was also formed quite peacefully, not counting the wars between the Mazurians and the Yotvingians in the early Middle Ages. The Krewo and then the Lublin unions between the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Polish Kingdom guaranteed the stability of this border. However, in the 19th century, already part of Russia, certain ethnic processes occurred that later served as a reason for disputing the ethnic belonging of Western Belarus. Some local residents of the Catholic faith, calling themselves Lithuanians, not wanting to succumb to Russification, called themselves Poles. Another part of Catholics continued to consider themselves Lithuanians or called themselves “tutejsi,” i.e., could not identify themselves with a specific nation (10).

The data from the 1897 census in Grodno province showed that the majority of the province’s population consisted of Belarusians, with the exception of Bialystok district, where due to the urban population, Poles predominated (in rural areas, the ratio of Belarusians to Poles was the same) (11). Initially, Poland tried to solve the problem of the western territories of Belarus diplomatically, especially since this was insisted upon by the Entente countries. Polish politicians sought to convince the leadership of the Entente countries that Poles constituted an ethnic majority in the lands east of the Bug River, i.e., in Western Belarus. In determining the nation, the authors of Polish maps took only the religious criterion as a basis: a Catholic means a Pole, an Orthodox means a Belarusian (12). Poland also sought the most reliable protection from Soviet Russia, and therefore it was necessary to move the border as far away from the center of Poland as possible. This explains Poland’s claims to the territories of Vilna, Grodno, and Minsk provinces.

The Border with Lithuania.

Beginning at Druskieniki, the border heads south of the city of Orany to the village of Voronovo, which is 30 versts north of the city of Lida, from where it makes a wide arc, capturing the cities of Vilna, N. Troki, through the villages of Olnenich, Klechy, Vysoky Dvor, Kleitovishki, Musniki, Shirovinty, and Dubinki, approaches the city of Svintiany, from where through the station Godushinki, the city of Vidzy and Lake Drisvyaty, stretches to the point of Turmonty, Novo-Alexandrovsky district, Kaunas province, which is the junction point of the borders of Lithuania, Belarus, and Courland.

(Since the other borders of Belarus are either not disputed at all or only disputed in some parts, the border with Lithuania is the subject of endless disputes. German and Lithuanian ethnographers and political figures on one side, Belarusian and Ukrainian on the other — here they sharply diverge. The text draws the border as Professor E. F. Karsky does, and as all members of the Council of the Republic understand it. By “all,” one can mean not only members of the Council and the People’s Secretariat but all Belarusians in general, since the city of Vilna, over which the dispute mainly arises, has long been a Belarusian city and has always been the center of the Belarusian movement, determining all Belarusian politics).

In relation to the territory of the so-called Belarusian part of Lithuania, the name Lithuanian Rus appeared on European and Russian maps as early as the 17th century. In the 18th century, most of Lithuania, including Vilna, was considered Belarusian-speaking and was unequivocally marked as Belarusian ethnic territory on all Western European and Russian ethnographic maps of the late 19th to early 20th centuries (13). The population of the Belarusian part of Lithuania called themselves Lithuanians but spoke Belarusian and considered themselves Slavs. The peoples of neighboring countries — Russia, Poland — referred to the local inhabitants as they did the ancient inhabitants of Lithuania — Lithuanians. According to the 1897 census data for Vilna province, it can be seen that, despite the deep penetration of Vilna province into the territory of modern Lithuania, the majority of its population consisted of Belarusians, with Lithuanians in second place and only Poles in third (14). In the northern part of the district, Lithuanians predominated, while in the southern part, Belarusians. Belarusians also constituted a majority throughout the province, except for Troki district. The most disputed territory was the city of Vilna. The most significant monuments in the history of Belarusian culture, literature, and art are associated with this city — the historical capital of the Lithuanian-Belarusian state; it was here that the Belarusian national movement was born and developed. Naturally, the figures of the BPR sought to uphold the right to include Vilna in the territory of Belarus. But it should not be forgotten that Vilna had also been a center of Lithuanian culture, science, and art for many centuries and that it was a peculiar symbol and capital for Lithuania as well. At the end of 1918, when determining the national belonging of Vilna and the surrounding lands, political motives were at play, not historical or ethnographic ones. An alternative to the bourgeois Lithuania was being created in this territory — the Lithuanian Soviet Republic, proclaimed on December 16, 1918, which needed to be strengthened. According to the official version, it was believed that since Vilna was the capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, it should belong to the Lithuanian Republic.

The Border with Courland.

This border is the shortest Belarusian border. According to the Lithuanian view, it is defined merely by a point — the city of Druya. According to Professor Karsky and several other ethnographers, the border from the city of Turmonty runs northeast of the city of Novo-Alexandrovsk, through the city of Illukst, to meet the Western Dvina River at the estate of Likshno, 14 versts downstream from the city of Dvinsk.

The Border with Livonia.

According to Lithuanian-German specialists, the border begins at the city of Druya and continues as the Belarusians lead it. Belarusian ethnographers, however, relate the border to the estate of Likshno, from where it, bypassing the city of Dvinsk and including it in the territory of Belarus, stretches along the Z. Dvina River to the city of Druya, where it turns north at a right angle and through the point of Dagda, the city of Lucin and the village of Yasnovy, heads towards the station Korsovka.

The northwestern corner of the ethnographic Belarusian territory: the districts of Dvinsk, Lucin, and Rezhitsky currently belong to Latvia. The specified ethnographic borders, as the area where the Belarusian population predominated, were defined by the works of Professor E. Karsky and A. Smolich.

It should be noted that the ethnographic borders of Belarus, designated by the figures of the BPR, most fully corresponded to the data of the 1897 census and the ethnographic maps compiled in Russia and abroad in the late 19th to early 20th centuries. They were scientifically substantiated based on a complex of signs, which took into account not only census data but also dialectal features of the language, traditions, customs of the people, as well as data from anthropology, archaeology, and toponymy of the territory.

The BPR government repeatedly tried to uphold the borders of Belarus both before neighboring states and before the world community. In April 1918, in a letter from BPR delegates to the German ambassador at the Ukrainian Rada, signed by A. Tsvikievich, Professor M. Dovnar-Zapolsky, and Doctor P. Tremkovich, it was noted: “At the same time, we insistently request the preservation of Belarus in its natural historical, ethnographic, and economic borders. Specifically, we insist on retaining Grodno region, the flow of the Pripyat River, and the city of Vilna for Belarus. …Regarding Vilna, we must remind you that it is the spiritual center of Belarus, which most vividly represents the idea of Belarusian statehood” (15).

In August 1918, the Council of the BPR expressed protest to the Reich Chancellor of Germany H. Gertling regarding the possible annexation of part of Belarus’s territory to increase the area of the Kingdom of Poland (16). Repeatedly from June to September 1918, statements and memorials from the Council of the BPR were sent to the Ukrainian government requesting recognition of the independence and indivisibility of Belarus in its historical-ethnographic borders. On October 10, 1918, a delegation from the BPR presented a note to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine regarding the official recognition of the BPR and the establishment of a state border between Ukraine and Belarus (17).

It is worth mentioning the delegation of the BPR government at the inter-allied meeting in Jassy in November 1918. The delegation was tasked with informing the allies about the state of the Belarusian question and the aspirations of the Belarusian people for independence, for which a memorandum on the historical development of the Belarusian people and a map of the ethnographic borders of Belarus was prepared.

No later than October 1918, an appeal from the BPR government was sent to the government of the Austro-Hungarian Empire requesting recognition of Belarus as “an independent republic that has definitively separated from Russia.” The appeal also mentioned the preservation of Belarus in its natural historical, ethnographic, and economic borders: “We will insistently ask for support in retaining for Belarus the territory of Grodno province, with the exception, perhaps, of the southern part of Brest district, the entire southern part of Minsk province, i.e., the flow of the Pripyat River and the basin of the Sosh River with the northern districts of Chernigov province. In the west, we stand for the protection of the entire territory of Belarus with the city of Vilna — our ancient capital, and from there to the east to Dvinsk. At the same time, we find it necessary to remind you that Vilna was not only our capital but also a military center and the center of the Belarusian movement” (18).

In December 1919, the Council of Ministers of the BPR (already in exile) sent notes of protest to the Polish government regarding Poland’s annexation claims on ethnic Belarusian territories: the Polish government was taking steps to seize the western part of Belarus: Vilna and Grodno provinces. Elections to the Polish Constituent Assembly were scheduled in the Belarusian districts of Grodno province. The Belarusian Augustów district of Suwałki province was included in Poland by government decree; mobilization was announced in Vilna for the Polish army (19).

Lacking armed forces to support their diplomatic claims and repel enemy troops, the Council of Ministers of the BPR appealed to the Great Powers — the USA, England, France, and Italy — with a request to take the territories of the Belarusian People’s Republic under their protection from being torn apart by neighbors (20). However, the complex external political situation in Europe and the internal political situation in Belarus did not allow the initiators of the BPR to realistically implement the ethnic borders of the republic. But their efforts were not in vain. The proclamation of the BPR and the description of its borders had significant political and psychological importance both in Belarusian lands and in the capitals of neighboring countries.

On December 30, 1918, the Northwestern Regional Party Conference opened, where the delegates spoke in favor of proclaiming the BSSR. At the conference, the borders of the republic were outlined, and according to the report of the commission created to study this issue, it was decided that the republic should include the entire Minsk, Mogilev, Grodno provinces, Vitebsk province without Dvinsk, Rezhitsky, and Lucin districts, as well as parts of neighboring provinces predominantly populated by Belarusians. This includes parts of Gzhatsk, Sychev, Vyazem, and Yukhnov districts of Smolensk province; part of the Novo-Alexandrovsky district of Kaunas province, the entire Vileyka district, parts of the Svintsyansky and Oshmyany districts of Vilna province, as well as the Augustów district of Suwałki province. The commission proposed to include four northern districts of Chernigov province: Surazhsky, Mglin, Starodubsky, and Novozybkovsky. In all places where the border, passing through parts of Vitebsk and Vilna provinces, is disputed, the border should be established by special government commissions (21). This map differed somewhat from the borders drawn by Dovnar-Zapolsky: in the Bryansk area, the border was to run westward — i.e., closer to the border of Mogilev province (Dovnar-Zapolsky had it through Bryansk), further the eastern border with minor deviations runs to Vitebsk province, where in the area of Rezhitsa it even shifts westward. Significant discrepancies can only be seen in the area of Vilna province — Dovnar-Zapolsky’s border ran through Novy Troki, while the BSSR’s was closer to Smorgon and Oshmyany; further, the borders practically do not diverge (notable differences in the borders with Poland in the area of Belsk, with Ukraine in the area of Novozybkov). Thus, the first borders of Soviet Belarus, established by the Northwestern Regional Conference at the very end of 1918, practically coincided with the ethnic borders of Belarus designated by the figures of the Belarusian People’s Republic.

1 Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Moscow, 1927. Vol. 5. P. 352.

2 Brygadzіn P., Ladysev U. Formation of the Idea of Belarusian Statehood in 1917-1918 // Belarusian Studies. Minsk, 1998. P. 67.

3 Ibid. P. 70.

4 Peace Treaty between Russia on one side and Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey on the other // Heritage. 1993. No. 2. P. 53.

5 Valatsich M. The Curzon Line against the Background of Events and Territorial Changes in Eastern Europe // Heritage 1993. No. 5.

6 Foreign Policy of Belarus: Collection of Documents and Materials. Minsk, 1997. Vol. 1. P. 38.

7 Shiryayev E. E. Belarus: White Rus, Black Rus, and Lithuania in Maps. Minsk, 1991. P. 13.

8 Here and further, the text of the document “Borders of the Belarusian People’s Republic” is presented in italics. National Archive of the Republic of Belarus. Fund 62, inventory 1, file 193. P. 53-56. The text retains the spelling of the original.

9 From the History of the Establishment of Soviet Power in Belarus and the Formation of the BSSR. Minsk, 1954. Vol. 4. P. 399.

10 Loyka L. Ethnogenesis of Belarusians against the Background of History and Geopolitics // Belarusian Past. 1997. No. 6. P. 24.

11 Shiryayev E. E. Op. cit. P. 13.

12 Ibid.

13 Siuchyk A. The Unknown War Against Belarus. Vilnius, 1993. P. 61.

14 Shiryayev E. E. Op. cit. P. 13.

15 Foreign Policy of Belarus: Collection of Documents and Materials. Minsk, 1997. Vol. 1. P. 46.

16 Ibid. P. 58.

17 Ibid. P. 64.

18 Ibid. P. 83.

19 Ibid. P. 89.

20 Ibid. P. 90.

21 From the History of the Establishment of Soviet Power in Belarus and the Formation of the BSSR. Vol. 4. P. 529.

LITERATURE

1. Administrative-Territorial Structure of the BSSR. Minsk, 1985. Vol. 1.

2. Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Moscow, 1927. Vol. 5.

3. Brygadzіn P., Ladysev U. Formation of the Idea of Belarusian Statehood in 1917-1918 // Belarusian Studies. Minsk, 1998.

4. Valatsich M. The Curzon Line against the Background of Events and Territorial Changes in Eastern Europe // Heritage. 1993. No. 5.

5. Zaprudnik Ya. At the Crossroads of History. Minsk, 1996.

6. Foreign Policy of Belarus: Collection of Documents and Materials. Minsk, 1997. Vol. 1.

7. From the History of the Establishment of Soviet Power in Belarus and the Formation of the BSSR. Minsk, 1954. Vol. 4.

8. Karsky E. On the Ethnographic Map of the Belarusian Tribe. No place, 1902.

9. Krutalievich V. A. BPR: On the Paths of National Self-Determination BPR, BSSR, RB. Minsk, 1995.

10. Loyka L. Ethnogenesis of Belarusians against the Background of History and Geopolitics // Belarusian Past. 1997. No. 6.

11. Mazets V. The Borders of the BPR // Heritage. 1993. No. 2.

12. Orshansky Ya. The Formation of the BPR: Views of Contemporary Historians // Materials of the Scientific Humanitarian Conference. Vitebsk. 1993.

13. Siuchyk A. The Unknown War Against Belarus. Vilnius, 1993.

14. Tsitov A., Kazlov L. Belarus at Seven Frontiers. Minsk, 1993.

15. Shiryayev E. E. Belarus: White Rus, Black Rus, and Lithuania in Maps. Minsk, 1991.

16. Yukho Ya. A. Belarusian Governments 1918-1921 and Their Powers // Belarusian Historical Journal. 1993. No. 4.

BELARUSIAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS No. 3 1999