Andrei Kazakevich: Russia wants to take Belarus’ foreign policy activity under control

Apart from direct pressure, Kremlin decided to offer Belarus a positive alternative to cooperation with the Western countries.

Aliaksandr Lukashenka will participate in the meeting of the leaders of BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) that is to take place on July 8-10 in Ufa, informed Belarus Foreign Minister Uladzimir Makei on June 8 in Moscow.

“The parties were pleased to note that Belarus' and Russia's positions regarding the most important issues on the international agenda have become closer. The ministers also talked over the achievements in promoting mutual interests of Belarus and Russia in international organizations and interstate associations,” the press service of the Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs informed.

Participation in Summits of BRICS and SCO should be viewed as the continuation of the course for constructing “distant arc” of Belarus’ foreign policy. Over the last month Belarus was visited by the leaders of China and India, while Lukashenka visited Pakistan. Asian vector has obvious predominance in Belarus’ foreign policy.

What is the “distant arc” of foreign policy? Why a European country is aiming at Asia? Why Lukashenka is invited to Summits of BRICS and SCO?

Andrei Kazakevich, the director of the Institute for Policy Studies Palіtychnaya Sphera (Political Sphere; Vilnius, Lithuania), answers the questions of “EuroBelarus” Information Service.

- All recent years Belarusan authorities have been telling about a “distant arc” over and over again. What is that?

- It is a question of diversification of Belarusan foreign and foreign-economic policies. Accordingly, the important resource for diversification is distant lands, with which we don’t have serious contacts, projects, and serious commodity circulation yet. First of all these are Third World countries, which are now called developing countries at different continents. Countries are developing, population is growing – this unknown space is a field where Belarus’ foreign and foreign-economic policy is poorly present. But this space has potential able to turn into pivot, an additional factor of diversification.

- Lukashenka calls Belarus a bridge that connects East and West. However, all attempts of Belarus’ foreign policy are aimed at building “distant arc”: China, Pakistan, and India. Why the official Minsk concentrated its attempts at the Asian region, if it wants to connect East and West?

- I only think of this compassion with the bridge as of a metaphor. I don’t think that Belarus might become this bridge, since West mostly communicates with East directly. Although geopolitical crisis of 2014 demonstrated that Belarus has certain potential as a mediator; nevertheless, distant arc won’t become a strategic line.

Scenarios and ways of building mutual relations with the West are worked over already, while Asian countries are not studied enough yet and relations with them still have to be built. Perhaps, the only exception is China, with which we have considerable cooperation; though, of course, it cannot be compared with Europe or Russia. Whereas all the other countries – Pakistan, India, Vietnam – are undiscovered and relations with them still have to be built; we only have a sketch of relations.

The countries listed are really growing: their influence and economic potential is growing. China and India are impossible to ignore if we consider Belarus’ place in the world division of labor and if we seriously put a goal of diversification and search for new resources and markets.

As compared to other alternatives (Latin America, which is noticeably further, and Africa, which is much poorer), these countries have certain economic potential Belarus could use. All the more that everything does that, including the EU. Belarus doesn’t open anything new, but only tries to follow the example of other countries of the European region.

 I think we need to take into account not the idea of a “distant arc” itself, but how we can create it, what countries, spheres, and projects should we stake at, since this is what the efficiency of the model depend on.

- Does the construction of a “distant arc” of politics with the Asian states, Latina America, and Africa have chances for success? Does European Belarus have chances to join the Third World countries and occupy particular place there?

- I don’t think that strategically Belarus has chances to join the Third World countries or occupy significant place there. It is technically difficult: due to geographic reasons Belarus will be very dependent both on Russia and on Europe, so it will be both very hard and ineffective for it to build expansionist policy.

However, building of a “distant arc” is generally possible and gives certain opportunities through the lenses of diversification and search for new pivots in foreign policy. It would be very desirable to have sustained economic stance in new states that are rapidly developing.

- Aliaksandr Lukashenka is going to take part in the meeting of BRICS’ and SCO’s leaders that is to take place on July 8-10 in Ufa. It is obvious that Lukashenka will come to the Summits only thanks to Putin’s efforts, since he himself has no relation to the named unions at all. What role has Kremlin prepared for Lukashenka?

- Apart from pressure on Belarus (which is trying to manoeuvre between the West and Russia), Kremlin, perhaps, decided to offer Belarus a positive alternative to cooperation with the Western countries and involve the work of the above-mentioned formations, and BRICS in the first turn. SCO can hardly be named a serious structured organization. All the more that Russia is viewing BRICS as an alternative to cooperation with the Western states; an alternative to G7, the US, and the EU. From Russia’s position it is logical to involve smaller states that Russia is interested in to this alternative, too. Invitation to UFA looks as a test that will hardly have any serious consequences.

- What can Belarus count at during the Summits of BRICS and SCO, where it isn’t even an observer?

- The maximum that Belarusan authorities can count at is to use Summits as an area for communication and establishing direct contacts with the leaders of these countries; unofficial discussion of projects. Perhaps, personal contacts will permit easier and quicker resolve the problems that exist in the bilateral relations.

Russia wants to take Belarus’ foreign policy activity under control.

- You say that Summits of BRICS and SCO are a positive alternative of Belarus’ cooperation with the EU. Thus, Kremlin is trying to reorient Belarus from European cooperation to the “distant arc”, isn’t it?

- It is indeed. Moscow is trying out a test version since in situation of confrontation with the West Russia is seriously trying to find an alternative to it. Immediately a need to involve other countries that Russia finds to be its allies or satellites in this process, where it has its strategic interests appears. It is clear that in Belarus Russia competes with the West, likewise in Kazakhstan, Central Asia, and Transcaucasia. The more alternatives to cooperation with the West Russian can find, the better for the Russian foreign policy. At least, it will be a strategy for drawing countries-satellites back from cooperation with the West.