Though the EU emphasised some positive trends in cooperation with the Belarusian authorities, the decision to lift sanctions contained critical remarks regarding Belarus’ non-respect for human rights.
The Belarusian authorities are counting on bolstered financial cooperation with the West without making political concessions, but through softening domestic policies. Most opposition leaders were sharply critical of the EU lifting sanctions and had not yet adjusted their strategies to the new political environment. The Kremlin, in turn, appears to be loyal to the ‘thaw’ in the Belarusian-European relations as it probably counts on the consideration of Russia’s interests within the Belarusian-European agenda.
The EU Ministerial Council decision has lifted the sanctions against 170 Belarusian senior government officials, including President Lukashenka, and 10 companies. Sanctions have been extended in respect of four persons, who were allegedly involved in forced disappearances of opposition politicians in 1999-2000: former Interior Ministers Vladimir Naumov and Yuri Sivakov, Head of the Presidential Administration Viktor Sheiman and Interior Troops Brigade Head Dmitri Pavlichenko.
The EU emphasised some positive trends in cooperation with the Belarusian authorities and praised the release of political prisoners. Nevertheless, the decision contained critical remarks regarding Belarus’ non-respect for human rights.
The Belarusian authorities expressed full satisfaction with the EU decision, despite the fact that some sanctions were still in place. The president emphasised the Foreign Ministry’s role in the warming of the Belarusian-European relations and the need to strengthen financial cooperation, "Well done, EU-policy makers, they realized this was the moment and they should depart from the bloc mentality and confrontation with Belarus. They took a completely satisfying decision for us”.
Most politicians from the ‘old opposition’ were sharply critical of the EU decision to lift sanctions against the Belarusian leadership. In their viewpoint, a dialogue between Minsk and Brussels would weaken the pro-European wing in the Belarusian opposition and, consequently, it would lose the support among the pro-European part of society. Most opposition leaders believe that Brussels has softened its policy towards Belarus for geopolitical reasons. In addition, they particularly emphasised that the Belarusian authorities could treat the lifting of the EU sanctions before the Parliamentary Elections as the EU’s final agreement to the lack of political reform. Nevertheless, the leaders of the United Civil Party and the Belarusian Christian Democracy who condemned the lifting of sanctions; and ‘Tell the Truth!’ leaders who supported the EU, are planning to participate in the 2016 Parliamentary Elections.
Some civil society representatives and analysts anticipate that amid the ‘thaw’ in the Belarusian-European relations, the Belarusian authorities may refrain from repression against the opposition and protest movements. In addition, human rights activists and opposition parties have hopes for some improvements in holding the parliamentary elections.
However, the civil society’s main concern is about preserving the ability to influence the agenda of the Belarusian-European relations. They fear that the EU may pay less attention to the civil society organisations and the media, which make the authorities unhappy. For instance, Poland-based Radio Racyja and Chanter97 expressed their concern about possible threats to their broadcasting due to Minsk’s pressure on Warsaw.
Unlike the Belarusian opposition, the Kremlin welcomed the EU’s decision to lift the sanctions against the Belarusian authorities. In addition, Russian commentators have not raised ‘concern’ about yet another Belarus’ ‘geopolitical shift’ towards the West.
Overall, the Belarusian authorities do not intend to meet the EU requirements, but are ready to make some minor concessions in order to mitigate tension in relations.
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.