This research investigates preconditions for the visa facilitation between Belarus and the EU.
The research explains existing barriers in this sphere, and finds out, how far has Belarus progressed in its visa relations with the EU, compared to the other EaP countries and Russia. It also studies the qualitative changes in the visa relations between Belarus and the European Union since 2008, that resulted from the EU institutional reform, adoption of new EU legislation and the change of the two sides intentions towards visa regime facilitation.
The following conclusions were made:
Unilateral visa regime facilitation from the EU side, including reduction or abolition of standard visa fees for Belarusans, is not realistic due to a number of legal and political factors. That is why lobbying efforts of Belarusan civil society should be redirected towards the Belarusian authorities, whose political will is indispensable for the visa facilitation with the EU.
Visa facilitation and simplified travels to the EU for a broad category of citizens are possible only when the visa facilitation agreement with the EU and Local Border Traffic agreements with the adjacent EU countries are entered into force. Official Minsk delays the start of negotiations on the former and does not launch the LBT agreements with Poland and Lithuania, due to political considerations.
Belarus lags behind all the other Eastern Partnership countries in terms of visa facilitation. Azerbaijan and Armenia have entered into negotiations with the EU on the issue, while Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine are already involved in the visa liberalization dialogue with the EU. In case of further inertia in this area, Belarus will appear a hopeless regional outsider in terms of the visa relations with the EU.
Apart from a reduced visa fee (EUR 35), standard visa facilitation agreements ease visa procedures to a limited extent. Moreover, currently Belarusans are issued more multiple-entry Schengen visas per capita, than citizens of the EaP countries with acting visa facilitation agreements. Thus, the most significant effect of the visa facilitation agreement for Belarus seems to be a legal possibility to start a visa liberalization dialogue with the EU.
He said Belarus would likely face economic tightening not only as a result of the coronavirus pandemic but also a Russian trade oil crisis that worsened this past winter.
The Belarusan National Platform of the EaP CSF issued a statement in connection with the wave of searches in the editorial offices of the Belarusan media and the detention of journalists.
On September 11, the inaugural „Vilnius Consultations“ conference was organized by Vilnius Institute for Policy Analysis and Lithuanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Not only does the "Union State" undermine the establishment of civilized relations with Europe, but it hinders the possibility of normal relations between Belarus and Russia.
Belarusan National Platform of the EaP CSF welcomes the dialogue process in the format of the EU-Belarus Coordination Group, the third round of which was held in Minsk on 3-4 April 2017.
The EaP CSF Steering Committee issued a statement on repressions against civil society activists and journalists in Belarus, in view of the demonstrations planned on 25 March 2017.
Belarusan President Lukashenko said on Tuesday a “fifth column” was plotting to overthrow him with the help of foreign-backed fighters, days before a planned street protest in Minsk against a new tax.
The Belarusian regime is not able to pursue a truly multi-vector policy, and the EU cannot decide what it needs in the region on the whole and from Belarus in particular.
He said Belarus would likely face economic tightening not only as a result of the coronavirus pandemic but also a Russian trade oil crisis that worsened this past winter.
In his report, philosopher Gintautas Mažeikis discusses several concepts that have been a part of the European social and philosophical thought for quite a time.
It is impossible to change life in cities just in three years (the timeline of the “Agenda 50” campaign implementation). But changing the structure of relationships in local communities is possible.