Andrei Sannikov: “Proposals of the West can bring Belarus to a new level”

A member of the organizing committee of the civil campaign “European Belarus”, a diplomat Andrei Sannikov has told Voice of America about the prospects of the relations between Belarus and the West.

The diplomatic row between Belarus and the US continues. The US Ambassador Karen Stewart has left Minsk “for short-term consultations”. And last Firday Belarusian Ambassador to the US Mikhail Khvastau was recalled from Washington.

As the statements of the Belarusian side indicate, it has been done in protest at imposing sanctions by the US Treasury against the Belarusian concern Belneftekhim.

However when the Foreign Ministry of Belarus “strongly recommended” the US Ambassador to Minsk follow the example of the Belarusian foil, the US Department of State gave to understand that the US has a right to independently solve the questions who and how would be in control of the diplomatic mission.

The recent events in the Belarusian-American relations have been commented to the Russian Service of Voice of America by Andrei Sannikov, a former deputy Foreign Minister of Belarus, and the international coordinator of the Charter’97.

- Well, the US Ambassador to Belarus Karen Stewart has left Minsk “for short-term consultations”, as the statement of the Department of State reads. The temporary character of this step has been stressed by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs David Kramer. At the same time, it is worth mentioning how Alyaksandr Lukashenka threatened to “throw away the US Ambassador from Belarus” in one of his statements in December last year. Last week the Foreign Ministry of Belarus recalled its ambassador from Washington “with fanfare”. To your mind, how the discrepancy in understanding the bilateral relations situation by Minsk and Washington could be explained?

- It’s hard to say. When I have read the interview of David Kramer to BelaPAN agency, frankly speaking I was extremely surprised that the US had made such generous offers to the Belarusian side. Adding the offers of the EU, the reaction of Minsk looks simply inadequate and does not imply any development of the situation.

Such a reaction could simply show that Alyaksandr Lukashenka is either given incompetent advice, or there is no one to give him advice at all, and on the contrary, the people who explain the situation for Lukashenka, deliberately conceal that the proposals made for Belarus today could simply bring Belarus as an independent state to a new level of development.

- Do you mean the words of David Kramer when he said the West would be prepared to begin a dialogue with Minsk not expecting all requirements, including respect to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, to be fulfilled; only under the condition of Alyaksandr Kazulin’s release?

- Yes, undoubtedly, that’s exactly what I mean, these offers are too generous. Speaking about the democratic opposition in general, it is not ready to understand such proposals, as there are still political prisoners except Kazulin, there are problems with freedom of the press and so on. That is why the proposals that have been done undoubtedly have been done expecting a breakthrough in the relations. But it is not taking place at the moment.

- To your mind, how such a harsh reaction of Minsk to publishing a Guidance to use of sanctions imposed last year by the US Treasury against Belarus could be explained? Experts differ in opinions. One people think that the US sanctions against Belneftekhim have caused serious damage to economic interests of Belarus. On the other hand, the official sources say that these measures haven’t affected the state of the economy of Belarus. How serious are the measures of the US Treasury under executive order 13405?

- I think that such a hysterical reaction of the Belarusian authorities demonstrates that the measures are serious. Both the reaction and attacks at the US and personally at the US Ambassador testify that some attempts are made to prevent large-scale imposing of these measures. As far as I understand, these measures are not acting in full force and effect. That is why it seems that the sanctions are serious if they would be widened. Then a serious blow on the leadership of Belarus would take place. However these attempts to prevent seriousness of the sanctions by sparking off a row could bring about even more negative results, while cool judgment and common sense can help to understand what had been offered.

- It comes under notice that Minsk tried to use aggravation of relations between the US and Belarus to drive a wedge between the EU and Washington. At the same time it is reported that in the framework of the “Belarusian week” in the European parliament, dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the Belarusian National Republic in March, the chairman of the European Parliament Hans-Gerd Pöttering stated that without a release of the political prisoner Alyaksandr Kazulin talks with official Minsk are impossible. To your mind, is the policy of Belarus aimed at dividing of the EU and the US successful?

- It’s not the first attempt to drive a wedge between them using the existing variations (I wouldn’t call it disagreement) in the approaches of the US and the EU towards the Belarusian situation. Speaking responsibly, in general from the point of view of the circles lobbying Lukashenka’s interests in Europe such an attempt could bring a temporarily success. But I would like to repeat that it is done with the help of those lobbyists who are not interested in a transparent business, but in a business the Belarusian situation allows to do. I think the governments and public in Europe should understand the gravity of the situation, and that the actions of the Belarusian regime would be aimed at seeking conflict between the US and the EU. That is why I think the democratic forces and Europe have a chance to prevent that.

- Expectations of the American side are that in the end of this month US Ambassador Karen Stewart would return to Minsk, and the precondition of the dialogue’s revival is Alyaksandr Kazulin’s release. Will Minsk yield to the US pressure this time?

- Once more the point is how soberly the situation is evaluated inside Belarus, and how unmistakably the Foreign Ministry and foreign affairs advisers tell Lukashenka what is going on around Belarus. This conflict in fact is advantageous to many people in Russia, in its government and in business circles, as it leads to a very difficult economic situation in Belarus, which would allow putting the Belarusian economy under bondage. But this won’t rescue the regime or its ruling coterie here in Belarus. On the contrary, it leads to a quicker destruction of the economic base for the Belarusian leadership. That is why I believe that one cannot expect quick answers to the abovementioned questions.

But putting the existing misgivings concerning Kazulin into one scale, and what could happen after accepting the sensible proposals of the US and the EU to the other, the second possibility would certainly weigh down the scale.

Source