What can explain the gross abuse of Alexander Lukashenko to the President of the European Commission and the President of Ukraine? What are the international implications will be closing down of newspapers "Narodnaya Volya" and "Nasha Niva"? How difficult the conditions put forward by Russia for the issue of Belarus rescue loans?
On these topics in the "Prague accent" political scientists argue: from Minsk — Andrey Fedorov, from Moscow — Kirill Koktysh from Warsaw — Anna Dyner.
Drakakhrust"Barroso and other goats" — these words from the mouth of the President of Belarus this week. And got vkrainskumu colleague, President Viktor Yanukovych, in which Lukashenko saw "vashyvasts." The reason for such a flow krasamovya was the conflict around the invitation of the Belarusian leader to the Chernobyl conference in Kiev. According to rumors, the European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said that he would not go to Kiev, if there is Lukashenko. As a result, the latter remained at home, and the insult did not go to a meeting with Ukrainian and Russian President at Chernobyl.
What was going to make the Belarusian leader, ablayvayuchy their partners? That they will be afraid and will make concessions? Just last week, the head of Belarus spoke about the necessity and inevitability of reconciliation with Europe. But it is doubtful whether the names of their potential partners, "goats" and "bulls" can facilitate this reconciliation. So what's the goal, that calculation?
FedorovIt is difficult not to agree with your last comment about what, voicing similar insults to their partners, it is possible to achieve better relations. But there is a great feature. You mentioned letter was made public on April 21, the donor conference in Kiev, which was Barroso and which allegedly canceled an invitation to Lukashenko, took place on April 19. Nevertheless, 21
April no claims suggested there was no reason they broke already on April 26. Or did not happen these days something that made the Belarusian leader to take such a step? I still do not believe that this was done intentionally. Here emotion overcame political calculation, there is something wrong and it caused such a strong reaction.
DrakakhrustKirill, and what do you see the reasons for this vyplyuhu krasamovya? Andrew said that it is possible after April 21, something happened. Well, that's a meeting of Yanukovych and Medvedev in Chernobyl. Maybe this is connected with such a reaction? And by the way, in their shchyravannyah Lukashenko and the meeting of the Chernobyl remembered somehow mysteriously, they say, it's not going to be singing along neither the one nor the other president.
Koktyish: At first it was vyplyuh emotions. But not only that. It seems to me that the main target was the Belarusian. If Belarus was not invited to the anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, though Chernobyl in Belarus — is supervalue when Belarus is isolated, even in this sad anniversary, the Belarusians have to explain what happened, how it could be. This is a tacit
question of the Belarusian society to the Belarusian president, but it exists, and some motivation had to give. So it seems to me that if the calculation was, he was first and foremost to the Belarusian audience. There may have been some kind of bargaining between the Belarusian and Russian presidents, when he went to a meeting. We do not know. But what about the mind, so it's an insult, and the need to explain the Belarusians, why it happened: because everyone else — the goats.
DrakakhrustAnna, Lukashenka's statements are often interpreted as the result of his ematsyynastsi, nyavytrymanastsi and unpredictability. But if the policy is held in the saddle 17 years, explains his emotional behavior, which is a euphemism for stupidity, such is not necessary. Maybe this was vyplyuhu and rational calculation?
Dyner: It seems to me that there is nothing rational in that it was not. In addition, it said,
Colleagues, I would add, that could be hurt by the fact that not only was not invited to Kiev, but gave no euroallied money for Chernobyl programs. He could also fear that Russia and Ukraine have agreed on something with the EU without Belarus. In principle, President Lukashenko always has been and always will be so.
Drakakhrust: Apparently, another gesture that deepens the divide between Europe and the official Minsk has sued the Ministry of Information to close two independent newspapers — "Nasha Niva" and "Narodnaya Volya". Returning in 2008, it was these publications in legal circulation has become one of the symbols of the causes and the dialogue between Belarus and the European Union. Now the signs and factors — the opposite. At the same time the political prisoners are released, resulting in only this "Judgment Week" their number will increase significantly.
These cases — not less offensive than words. This dive abyss or the accumulation of trumps — the more now imprison and close, the greater will be who and what in the future to release and resolve?
Koktyish: It seems to me that there is accumulation of trumps, but the main factor — is the economic situation in Belarus. Now it is obvious that
the gap between revenues and expenditures, between consumption and production is growing and that results in spontaneous devaluation, which is actually already happening. If consumption is reduced, it is necessary to consolidate the power, if it has a specific resource. Need to "sell" the public fear that it will not indignant and did not act, and to be able to maintain the state of affairs in the present form, even if the funds for the security forces will be significantly less.
The obvious technology. If you have power and you do today demonstriruesh that will be very tough tomorrow, even if you do not have the resources to maintain this level of power, society will obey out of habit.
It is generally quite a difficult task — to force society to consume substantially less than it consumes today. It is difficult to avoid social unrest, and therefore seeks to power as much as possible to simplify the structure, yet have the resources for such simplification. But this is not the way, this is a tactic. After all, the industrialized country to significantly reduce the consumption is unlikely.
Dyner: I can not fully agree with the opinion that it is only for the Belarusian society, that it did not object. It is one of the factors. I think that Lukashenka just confused after the election, he does not know how to behave and makes some strange moves. As for the prisoners on December 19, he does not want to release them, showing that they were imprisoned without cause.
He wants to show the range and Russia and that
of his country, he runs alone, that all these issues will be resolved only he that regardless of the economic problems of the internal policy of Belarus is its exclusive domain.
I fear that the political prisoners, as well as the rediscovery of the "Nasha Niva" and "Narodnaya Volya" will be the subject of bargaining for some concessions from the EU. I hope it will not be that the situation will not be repeated in 2008, when Lukashenko led just such a game.
Fedorov: I kind of agree with Cyril that intimidate a population, it never hurts. This does not mean that it will be ready for mass actions, but to show him his power — it is always a good idea.
The fact that Anna said about the trade, it is also likely mean. And the fact that this deepens the abyss — it's not a very confused and is seen as the inevitable costs.
I believe that if in 2008 the "Narodnaya Volya" and "Nasha Niva" was returned to the subscription catalog and in kiosks "Soyuzpechat," no one had any illusions that this is done sincerely that the Belarusian leadership liked the process of liberalization. And now it comes back to what it was before, and demonstrates its essence. I believe that he enjoys being a situation where it can do what it wants.
Drakakhrust: This week, Russian Ambassador to Belarus Alexander Surikov announced the terms under which Russia will give Belarus a long-awaited rescue loans in the amount of three billion dollars.
He called the two sets of factors. One — what he called the conditions — it is about the same as that of Belarus seeks IMF responsible social and fiscal policies, a flexible exchange rate and privatization. About the last diplomat entered into correspondence debate with President Lukashenko, who is the current president's message said that public ownership — is the people's property and can not be divided.
But a second group of factors ambassador formulated as a wish, they say, Russia is interested to buy the second half of "Beltransgaz", it would return to the project introduction of the Russian ruble in Belarus, Belarus would be nice to make concessions on the issue of unification of the MAZ and KAMAZ.
What is the relationship between these conditions and wishes? Without the introduction of the Russian ruble will not give loans? Can Lukashenko, for example, to exchange the condition of responsible fiscal policy for the willingness to sell the other half of "Beltransgaz"? How should we understand this complex system environment and wishes?
Koktyish: Main — these are the terms that have been agreed with the IMF. Russia is not sure that she will return someday Minsk these loans and wants to enlist the support of international organizations.
As for the rather provocative suggestions about the transition to the Russian ruble, today Moscow is not ready, there begins an internal fight, the pre-election situation is completely incomprehensible and others are not needed there. I believe that this proposal is about the single currency is done now for him to say "no." And later, in the midst of an election campaign in Russia if he could not raise the issue of the union state to wheedle money out of Russia.
In "Beltransgaz" Russian enough to buy only one more action to get a grip.
As for MAZ and KAMAZ, then this deal it is since 2001, when Oleg Deripaska became interested in her and promised that MAZ way will work. But it's not so much money and "weather" in bilateral relations, they do not.
DrakakhrustAndrew, some believe that the conflict with the West, Belarus Russia now occupies an extremely advantageous position and can push Minsk virtually any conditions, including the condition of the absorption of Belarus. Kirill believes that the position of Russia, except here emveefovskih these conditions, or defensive — that Lukashenko did not climb to its electoral garden, or essentially indifferent — well, nice to get the whole "Beltransgaz" nice to Belarus introduced at the Russian ruble, but will live without it. And how do you assess the intentions of Russia?
Fedorov: I think that while it's not a threat, it is still a warning. Moscow reiterates that these questions is that they are not abandoned forever. It is definitely interested, but not in order to get all the Belarusian economy (although it would be nice), but in order to gain influence, involve Belarus in its geopolitical orbit, so that she did not even move.
I believe that Moscow's pressure will continue and intensify. Perhaps, before the election, he will surely be less stashed. And the purpose of this pressure — change power here, this will be used by all means. Now it is impossible to draw a single currency in Belarus, because we still have some "family silver" and we can hold out for some time. But if the current policy of the Belarusian authorities will continue, sooner or later will come a time when Moscow is able to do whatever he wants, but in the meantime it will be ready to replace the current government.
DrakakhrustAnna, but as with your side of the Bug looks like this geopolitical dialectic? Lukashenko violates the rules, violating human rights, Europe appropriately respond to it and it turns out that not only Lukashenko, but also in Belarus is much more dependent on Russia. It becomes possible to those plans mentioned by Andrew. So this was the purpose of the European policy?
Dyner: It was not the goal of European policy. For the EU, it is very important that both Belarus and Ukraine could decide for themselves so that they can freely cooperate with the EU and Russia. For this project, and was founded by the "Eastern Partnership", the EU has been in contact with Belarus and other former Soviet countries. Goal was not to draw Belarus from Russia's influence, as it is impossible.
It is a pity that the partnership goals were not achieved, the authorities of these countries, notably Belarus, have made the choices they did. They could choose the IMF could pick money from the EU, but in exchange for specific reforms. But they have chosen a different path — Russia.
A Russia — as a bear, it will wait, and if it is the right time, this is a fly swat.
Drakakhrust: And finally — the question of whether all the geopolitical happiness for Belarus is on the Moscow-Brussels-Washington? The visit of Alexander Lukashenko in Ashgabat this week reminded that the world is not converged wedge on these capitals. Once Hugo Chavez gave money to Belarus, it is worth remembering that last year's Venezuelan oil project, so loud and noisy. It was said that China gives Belarus $ 15 billion, against those dollars do not understand, why do we have to beg for something Russian. Can Lukashenko found badly he needed the money somewhere else other than Moscow?
Fedorov: Some money for this line certainly is. V
isit to Turkmenistan was prepared in advance, there is quite a large construction project
Combine potash, it is designed for a billion dollars. Perhaps to some hundreds of millions of dollars out there you can count. Perhaps, in the same Venezuela can continue in China. But, by the way, about 15 billion is not even mentioned in his annual message, so, apparently, there's something not work. But, by and large, serious money for Belarus is only in Russia and, to a much lesser degree and with a much more severe conditions — in the West. So you have to drive, you need to look for some support, but it is not decisive.
President Lukashenko would first like to show that it is independent in its politics. This line of international politics is conducted in Belarus in 2007-2008 — the search for partners, other than the EU and Russia. Belarus can find money in these countries, but they are not equal to those funds that she could get out of Russia or the European Union.
DrakakhrustKirill, if I remember correctly, after each presidential election Lukashenko his first overseas trip was to Moscow. And now — Ashgabat. By the way, why Ashgabat, rather than, say, Baku? During last year's gas dispute with Russia thanked Ilham Aliyev for the term loan of $ 200 million.
Koktyish: Obviously, it was hoped that the first foreign visit will be to Kiev. It is symbolic of Chernobyl. But this did not happen and so I had to go to Berdymukhamedov. Why him and not to Aliev? Because Belarus has reduced purchases of Azerbaijani oil, because there is no money corny, but on Berdimuhamedov can still earn something. So far in Belarus and Turkmenistan projects has not happened.
Projects in third countries, usually first loudly proclaimed, but then forget about them once. No one recalls the Belarusian-Iranian cooperation, mentioned a lot, went off to the side Venezuelan topic on China's nobody remembers.
Let's see what will happen with Turkmenistan, but so far do not allow precedents to be too optimistic.