Lukashenka continues maneuvering between the West and Russia. However, it rather guarantees his own survival than the country’s successful future.
During the previous week Aliaksandr Lukashenka managed to do lots of statements: to fulfil any promise of Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko the meeting with him in Kiev, whereas a few days later he tried to provide Vladimir Putin with alibi in the discussion about new trade wars.
However, the main goals of Lukashenka’s foreign visits have probably remained the same: to affirm his stable stance in Belarus, as well as to get benefits from the foreign partners with his neighbors – Russia and Ukraine – that are basically in the situation of an armed conflict.
“EuroBelarus” Information Service talked about the foreign maneuvers Belarusan authorities have been making recently with Andrei Kazakevich, political scientist.
- Lukashenka and Nazarbaev made an almost simultaneous visit to Ukraine. Is the union of two countries that would be in opposition to the politics of Putin’s Russia possible?
- Probably, yes, especially if it touches upon the political level of relations. When the coalition of the three countries within the frames of the EEU was formed, such variant must have been discussed, as only in this case the participants of the union could exert some influence on Russia.
There is certain asymmetry in bilateral relations of Belarus and other countries, so the possibility for political or economic pressure of the stronger side is preserved. However, when two players take one stance it becomes much more reinforced, leaving fewer opportunities for Russia to exert pressure on two countries at once.
- Do Belarus and Kazakhstan have many common interests when it comes to opposing Russia?
- It is hard to say, as different countries might have different positions and coalitions.
However, it is important to understand that Belarus-Kazakhstan bock is strategically important within the EEU, as only this coalition allows to really getting something from Russia, such as norms and decisions that are unprofitable for Russia.
- Talking about problems with supplies of Belarusan goods to Russia and transit through Russia, Lukashenka was trying to shield Putin as if he hadn’t been taking part in these discrimination decisions. He really doesn’t want to quarrel with the Russia President, does he?
- This is a widespread diplomatic move. Of course, Lukashenka doesn’t want an open conflict with Putin, as it would only decrease the possibility of getting any preferences from him.
Lukashenka announced about the problems in public, but left the Russian authorities space for maneuvering, adding that the decisions were coordinated neither with Putin nor with the Eurasian Economic Commission, thus presenting the situation so that there seem to be no one to blame at the higher level.
I would consider Lukashenka’s statements to be a part of a diplomatic game, where he doesn’t refuse from his demands, but at the same time doesn’t set Russia at bay.
- In Moscow Lukashenka talked about his presidency. According to him, he will stay even if the whole world is against him. Is Lukashenka afraid that Russia might play against him at the president election?
- There is always place to such fear, as practice shoes that Russia’s foreign policy decisions can be very unpredictable. Of course, there are people among Russian elite who want Lukashenka to be dismissed.
Over the last months Russian media issued quite a lot critical articles re Lukashenka that highlighted different things, including nationalistic aspect, claiming that Lukashenka becomes more nationalistic, which might pose a threat to Russian interests.
All that might indicate that Russia is somehow thinking about Belarusan election.
I would think of Lukashenka’s statements in Moscow as of a preventive move demonstrating his readiness for pressure.
- Not long time ago Moscow announced that it would like to dispose additional jets and helicopters in Belarus. What do you think, is Lukashenko ready to limit Russian military presence in the country? Or he thinks that Russia can’t repeat Ukrainian scenario in Belarus?
- I think that Belarusan authorities are not happy about it and will somehow oppose it.
From the point of view of Belarus’ security, after Ukrainian events the growth of Russian military presence is not very good. On the other hand, it is not that critical, as Russian contingent in Belarus will rather have symbolic and psychological meaning, as it can’t change the situation in the region.
That is why the assessment of these appeals by the Belarusan authorities will be respective: it is not of any use for us, it worsens our situation, it can enhance tension at the borders; however, it can happen if Russia will pay some extra money to us.
- With all the problems in Belarus-Russia relations over the last time contacts between Belarusan, European, and American officials have improved. Can we expect some real breakthrough in relations between Belarus and the West? Or, vice versa, political part of the EEU will only be developing?
- Indeed, Belarus-West contacts are improving, and parties make certain statements about it.
However, I think that some revolution that will reorient Belarus towards the West in hardly possible.
At the moment Belarus is too tied with Russia, both economically and politically. That is why improvement of relations with the EU and the US will be used by the Belarusan authorities as an extra trump or counterbalance in the game with Russia.
Belarus is most likely to stay in the circle of Russia’s influence; however, better relations with the West give Lukashenka additional trumps and space for maneuvering.
- What if the crisis in Russia worsens to the degree that it doesn’t have anything to pay Belarus for its loyalty?
- This is another variant of how things can develop. However, it is only possible if the crisis is very acute, and still it is hard to forecast what can happen in this situation.
One of the possible scenarios presupposes that Lukashenka declines financial aid from Russia and starts getting closer to Russia. But if we consider everything we have today, we’ll see that this scenario is hardly feasible.
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.