Martin Uggla: EU should realize that Belarus won’t introduce systemic reforms; we can’t trust regime

The head of Östgruppen assumes that the EU needs to define the goal of its policy towards Minsk – whether to mend relations with the regime or promote the development of democracy in Belarus.

Let us recall that the Swedish human rights organization Östgruppen demanded to dismiss Maira Mora, the Head of the EU Delegation to Belarus. Human rights defendants assumed that with her actions Maira Mora violates basic EU values and official EU policy. One of the main claims to Mora and Brussels in general was the unclear stance on political prisoners. In the dialog with the authorities different kind of questions were raised, whereas this problem wasn’t voiced, which suggested double standards policy. It is bad for the EU’s reputation, but is even worse for the situation with human rights in Belarus.

In the interview with the “EuroBelarus” Information Service Martin Uggla, the head of Östgruppen notes that recent release of political prisoners and cessation of Maira Mora’s work in Belarus doesn’t at all lift the questions that European human rights fighters have to European officials.

- We criticized Maira Mora not for only for her compliments towards Belarusan authorities. Her actions as the head of EU representation in Belarus created a clear image about the use of double standards on the part of Europe. One day she paid a compliment to the regime, and in three days could voice EU’s concern with the fate of the political prisoners. It’s hard to say now what are the real goals of the EU, but I don’t think that their policy aims at being perceived as double-faced. Although now we really see the tendency of closer relations with Minsk and that, of course, concerns us. We feel that the aim is to med relations with the Belarusan authorities and at the same time get something instead, some minimal steps forward, so to say. The recent release of political prisoners is very positive news. We welcome that, but there are apprehensions that it will become suffice for the EU and turn into a reason to make concessions in return.

- Thus, the release of political prisoners cannot be a sufficient step so that to completely unfreeze EU-Belarus relations, can it?

- No, it cannot. Of course, the release of the political prisoners cannot but be good news. But globally it doesn’t change anything, since the repressive system remains. Now the new case of “graffiti artists” has appeared, which vividly exemplifies that new political prisoners might appear in Belarus at any moment. Human rights fighters are convinced that all political prisoners should be completely rehabilitated and restored in their rights. Whereas we see restrictive measures, preventive registration, i.e. restriction. And all that is not new, but was used against the political prisoners that were released during the previous years.

The problem is that I think we cannot just trust Lukashenka and his system. The correct behaviour of the EU, as I see it, would be to continue insisting on systemic reforms without being fooled by what seems to be concessions. With that I am sure that Lukashenka won’t go as far as introducing systemic reforms, since it is built at repressions; so if he surrenders the whole system will fall to pieces. And that is what the EU has to understand. Here we come to the main question – what is the EU’s goal? Is it to mend relations with the regime or promote democratic development in the EU? If the aim is to develop relations, then we can, of course, make concessions step by step, develop the dialog, and keep hoping that Belarusan side will go for concessions, too. But if the aim is to promote democracy in Belarus, then it’s obvious that such policy won’t help that in any way, but rather helps to retain and strengthen Lukashenka’s stance.

- Östgruppen had sent inquiries to the Swedish Foreign Ministry in order to clearly define EU’s political stance on Belarus. Did any answer follow?

- The Ministry didn’t explain their position, but said that it is above their competences. As I understood, there was no desire to discuss this topic at all. The official stance of the Swedish Foreign Ministry remains the same: beautiful words about democracy and fundamental European values. But in practice everything has changed – it has been changing gradually for several years. First the officials didn’t want to tease the Belarusan side with some strident remarks, all the more after the Swedish Embassy has started working again – they didn’t want to risk the situation. Thus, while in the documents everything remains the same, in practice no one in the Swedish Foreign Ministry raises a voice against the Belarusan authorities, which is a pity, of course. Obviously, this is the price that the Swedish authorities have paid in order for the Embassy to start working again.

- You were not let into Belarus last time, when World Hockey Championship was taking place in Minsk; are you going to visit Belarusan capital during these elections?

- Perhaps I will try to apply for a visa. I haven’t made a final decision yet, but I really would love to visit Belarus, though I am sure I won’t be let into the country. Last time they made it very clear that I am in the “black list” for the Belarusan authorities. Obviously, “liberalization” doesn’t cover me.