Belarus-US: geopolitical context the diplomatic conflict

These and other questions in the program "Prague accent" discussions are: Washington — Director of Russian and Asian programs at the World Security Institute Nikolai Zlobin, Minsk — registered in Poland, chairman of the Belarusian Schumann Society Igor Lyalkov and publicist Alexander Fyaduta.
Tsigankov: "Why the United States to reverse its decision to end the activities of embassies in Washington and Minsk? Himself this step looked as sharp and decisive step superpower that is not willing to make concessions. But there is no cancellation of the decision look like a weakness? Does this not give grounds Belarusian leader believes that it is possible to continue the policy exchanges blows without fear that the South American strike will be very strong? "
Why Belarus is not afraid of the South American response?

Zlobin"I think the impact of Belarus Americans, of course, have no fear. But the problem is that in the South American establishment have a disagreement about how to proceed in similar situations. Severe Many people they say that the more we limit the communication with the or any other state, the more we introduce sanctions and cut off contact, the less chance to influence this country and aware of what is happening there. Because under any circumstances can not close the embassy to restrict communication — they say they are.
In contrast, more than knit in Belarus in international affairs, the harder mode will keep its own status quo. And, of course, there are people that they say that you should not speak with Minsk, no need to read with Hamas, with Hezbaloy — as punishment. This struggle between the 2 lines is constantly happening. But now many hardline bands were defeated on many fronts, and overwhelmed supporters engage in dialogue.
Second reason is that in the U.S. comes a radical change of administration. The Bush team leaves for the first time in decades in the whitewashed house is not fighting, none of the current administration. Will newcomer team. And in American political culture is not accepted transfer crises newest team, as it will be a transition period, and immediately be impossible to do it. Especially since the crises that are created in the last months of the administration of an old. A team of new candidates (all 3) while trying not to make any sudden movements, so do not limit yourself in the future. They currently are not fighting for the success of American diplomacy in the world, but because of internal South American voter. "
"The behavior of the new owner of the Kremlin will not provoke an escalation continue Lukashenko Belarusian-American conflict"
Tsigankov:
  "From the analysis of Nikolai Zlobin that vnutryamerykanskaya layout at the moment is not very sharp and promotes the most decisive step towards Belarus. Fyaduta Alexander, or do you agree with that assessment?"

Fyaduta: "I fully agree with the sovereign Zlobina and can only add some aspects. As they say," who is not in one or another situation, it is not right. "If the U.S. Consulate in Belarus will not, they will still be able to influence the situation in the country through any political action on the international stage and maintaining a certain part of the Belarusian opposition from abroad — but still it will not be as great as if the embassy will operate in Belarus.
In addition, it should be recalled that there is a change not only the management of the United States, and the management of. If you look at how the electoral campaign in the United States, it is clear that Russian voice quite strong. Russia criticized everything, even now, and Hillary Clinton. If Russia is next to another "bad boy" with which to fight, it will be clear once the voters. "
Tsigankov: "So all the same or does not accept the official Minsk all this as a manifestation of helplessness Yankees? Either not confident analysis, which gave you a sovereign Zlobina that now can not be afraid of Washington?"
Fyaduta: "Do not take, because in Minsk at the moment the same problem. As the U.S. did not know what to do with Minsk, Minsk so does not know how to behave not only with the United States, and Russia. Not clear what the course will be Medvedev stick — most likely he will try to lower that film, which caused over in the international arena in recent years, Vladimir Putin. believe that the behavior of the new owner of the Kremlin will not provoke an escalation continue Lukashenko Belarusian-American conflict.
"The United States do not pose Belarusian management unworkable criterion"

Lyalkov: "Analysis of the lords and Zlobina Feduta, which in principle is quite fairly and accurately reflect the situation, adding that the Americans can not allow yourself to just walk away from Belarus, while there remains a" hostage "South American citizen Zeltser. Unutryamerykanski This first factor, this Journalists are a scandal — and that nobody needs in the United States.
Has sounded the EU factor. Just the EU could affect the State Department’s decision to postpone the toughest step. I would totally taken aback when at one point revealed that there was some request from the European Union, or from Germany or France (which currently intensively engaged reconciliation with the Belarusian regime) to postpone this drastic solution and not tie their hands in dialogue with the Belarusian regime.
As for how long this conflict will last, then this war nerves. Because in fact, as I understand U.S. policy, they do not pose Belarusian management unworkable criterion. Kazulin’s release — the condition is quite feasible, and, as we know, the Belarusian regime was close to this. Currently regime began to take new hostages (Kim and Parsyukevich), but the South American conditions remain fully enforceable.
And on the other side of the balance means lie. If you look objectively, the Yankees stronger position, and impartially Belarus would have to make concessions. But in the country, many decisions are taken personally, because as long the situation will last until hard to say. "
Tsigankov: "Igor Lyalkov argues that Belarus could go on the release of political prisoners. This may be, it looks fairly correct, but in practice there is a personal factor. Indeed, Alexander Lukashenko is very difficult to release Alexander Kozulin. But in general — do not find that the Belarusian- American businesses have stalled? In countries such great variation in political and ideological approaches to almost all problems, it’s hard to see the where you can find the reason for at least symbolic of improving relations. Where can be a mess, even if the parties would want him to do? "
Zlobin: "At the present day, of course, see the break very hard. For the Yankees has a huge problem of political prisoners, a fundamentally important, and it is — human rights and freedom of the opposition — the fundamental thing that determines how Americans relate to other countries as determined by other modes. In this sense, the Lukashenko regime falls into the category of low only for the Yankees — and in this respect we can not expect a compromise between the South American principles and what is happening in Belarus. But is it a dead end? I think not.
What is happening in the U.S. — the struggle of different approaches to Belarus — can lead to the fact that regardless of the relationship between with 2 elites, relations between societies, between people start to develop, and it eventually begins to define a policy of their own states. Countries ca
n cooperate or not, and the people are friendly, not friends, like each other or do not like. And it can lead to the fact that the management of Belarus and the United States will be required to think about how to find a compromise, because society will need to improve relations.
Currently there are no orders for this product. Because no offer. Political elite in the U.S. and Belarus feel that their no pressure, and can do what they wish, according to their own beliefs vuzkaelitarnyh. Because in fact it is not a dead end, because there are many options greatly from business to culture, where there may be breakthroughs that, in the end, is more important than political differences. But it is under no circumstances does not negate the South American fundamentally installation on freedom of political opposition. No way of Americans do not pay. "
"In the Belarusian issue to listen to France and Germany, the United States will not be"
Tsigankov"We’ve heard enough optimistic outlook sovereign Zlobina. Whether you agree with the fact that Belarus and South American society so may affect the actions of politicians? Where and when can come a positive breakthrough in the relationship?"
Fyaduta: "Maybe I’m shy, but I do not see where it can be made a breakthrough in bilateral relations, where you can find points of mutual understanding. Economic intrigued in Belarus in the United States is not, but there are political intrigued, because this is the last European authoritarian country. What something to do with this state need, much less that it is sayuznitsay Russia. Earlier, the U.S. are, in my opinion, very seriously — so compromise with Lukashenko unfeasible. Especially since there is a certain antagonism towards Belarus between the United States and lead counsel in Minsk the European Union, there are many issues in the United States to Germany and France — that’s why the Belarusian issue to listen to these countries the U.S. will not. "
Lyalkov: "As for the impact of society on the foreign policy of their own country, the United States this is true, then the impact can be very large. Only intrigued Belarus Society of America zero or even below zero. Regarding Belarusian society, it is, unfortunately, on this day influence on the foreign policy of their own country are not able to. "
Tsigankov: "Besides, in the Belarusian society is strong enough anti-American sentiment, which are supported by the Belarusian and Russian now and propaganda."
Lyalkov: "Yes, a large part of society behavior Lukashenko cause positive emotions -" which he is a cool young man, showed that "the Yankees." But there is another factor — the impact of the economic elites and the shortfall. If Americans fail to keep a fairly long sanctions, it will work (in Belarusian criteria can not be read on the pressure) the impact of certain groups who will be interested in defrosting Belarus-US relations particularly for economic reasons. "
Tsigankov: "Do not assign a certain boldness Alexander Lukashenko in the confrontation with the United States in the formation of certain anti-American coalition of the world, which includes strategic partners Belarus — Venesuela, Iran, under certain conditions, China?"
Lyalkov: "Is it only psychologically — that he was not the only one that can be the creation of a broad anti-American front. Essentially, it is very far perspective, and these countries are very different interests. If it feels at Lukashenko is, a psychological deception."
Tsigankov: "I do not happen to be defining the EU position in this conflict? Either show Brussels Euro-Atlantic solidarity, or (as often happens in times of conflict the United States with other countries) remains sidelined, while continuing to pursue a more Myagenkaya policy and how we can estimate the Russian nuance of this story? On denkov visited Minsk, Russian Defense Minister Serdyukov, the two sides talk about the strengthening of military cooperation, conducted joint military exercises. Either looks Minsk to Moscow and Europe when starting such conflicts? "
"Today, to submit themselves to the situation, if the United States, European Union and Our homeland sat down to decide what to do with Belarus as change it — it seems to me impracticable"
Zlobin: "Of course, part of the problem of this kind are due to the fact that the Russian-American and Russian woman-European affairs are currently far not in the best shape. And many countries are trying at the moment to fish in troubled waters these problems, and play nicely on these contradictions. But it’s the 19th century and even the middle of the 20th, when he was the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.
Now imagine the situation for themselves, if the United States, European Union and Our homeland sat down to decide what to do with Belarus as change it — it seems to me impossible. The former Soviet Union was formed quite a lot of countries that have taken place. A Belarus — certainly, the government accomplished. And decide the fate of Belarus outside Belarus — it means vorachivatsya to political technologies of a century ago, which now do not work.
Another thing is that the European Union and the United States are required to have a common position for such things as freedom of the press, human rights, freedom of the opposition. In this issue, I think the unity of Europe and the United States is and will be. Another thing is that in the field of strategy, they may disagree, because in the United States now has no ability (and well, what does not) to force the European Union to act in line with U.S. policy, because … "
Tsigankov: "So you think that they operate separately? Either they conduct a common policy, just with different functions -" good cop, bad cop ", as some say our analysts?"
Zlobin: "I think they are together at a basic level. But on the question of what to do with the Belarusian regime politically they crawl. U.S. But far away, and for them it’s not the most serious migraine, and Washington would give pleasure to this dilemma of the European Union.

But eventually the Europeans will be more stringent, because it is their Europe, and they fundamentally, that such regimes do not exist here. Because over time the Europeans will take a tougher stance when it comes to fundamentally questions

Another thing is whether he can solve this dilemma without Washington, because here the role played by both Moscow and countries outside the EU. Because there is unity in the principles, but there is no consensus about the political steps that should be addressed.
Europeans are closer, and more than ever wary of how geopolitical steps on the ancient continent, because they will think 3 more times, before making a move. But ultimately, I think the Europeans will be more stringent, because it is their Europe, and they fundamentally, that such regimes do not exist here. Because I think that over time the Europeans will take a tougher stance when it comes to issues fundamentally.
As for the Russian Federation, it comes from the fact that it requires a security belt around its territory. Belarus — a fundamental part of such a security zone. But Belarus may be the belt only to the extent that she wants. I do not think that now in Russia has great potential to influence the policy of Belarus, — well, there is no such desire. But militarily prices coincide in economic — are practically the same. So it is not the impact of Moscow, and the coincidence of many interests, including anti-Americanism. So get this impromptu where we litsezreem coincidence of interests. "
Tsigankov: "Alexander, do you agree that now is the majestic powers can no longer decide the fate of Belarus?"
"Let’s wait and we" Marshall Plan "for Belarus"
Fyaduta: "Unfortuna
tely, in this matter, I believe that the sovereign Zlobin wrong. So, the 21st century, but what concerns Belarus, our fate will be decided specifically because he dared not once in the 18th, 19th and 20th century."
Tsigankov: "Do you think Alexander Lukashenko will agree with that statement?"
Fyaduta: "No, I think that Igor Lyalkov not agree with me. But there will be no public decision-making, which will be announced. No proposals will be formed — Belarusian management agrees with them. Or disagree, and then receive a nomination which will also proposed superpowers. This can, and boring, but it provides some hope. Indeed, if the fate of Belarus will be resolved specifically so that those who do so decide, will bear some responsibility for what will happen. Certainly, we will wait and the "Marshall Plan" for Belarus. fact that aid to Belarus after Lukashenko finals will be called exactly these circumstances, just makes such a stubborn self-conscious as I am, in some sense an optimist. "
"The current ambassadors of France and Germany remind me Daladier and Chamberlain"
Lyalkov: "I have a positive answer to the question of whether our homeland and the European Union dramatically affect the Belarusian-American conflict. Minsk really looks at Russia and the EU in particular, for economic reasons, because the trade is almost 100 percent goes there.

EU policy, appeasement Lukashenko — not more resembles the situation of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which read Zlobin sovereign, and the situation of the Munich Pact. And the current ambassadors of France and Germany remind me of such recognizable characters as Daladier and Chamberlain.

Another thing — whether they want the EU to influence Belarus. Policy, which now holds the European Union, Lukashenko appeasement — it reminds me more is not the situation in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which read as sovereign Zlobin, and the situation of the Munich Pact. And the current ambassadors of France and Germany remind me recognizable characters such as. Daladier and Chamberlain. They are trying to reconcile. Only now farmed out to a totalitarian regime is not the half of Europe, and just only one country and its people.
Unfortunately, such a policy the EU will last, and there differences between the U.S. and Europe will continue.
As for the Russian Federation, the Moscow just is the spectator, for whom all this anti-American show and played out. This initiative first Belarusian side to show their "coolness" of. After kissing in the oil no longer listed and traded muscles and coolness. By the way, visit of the Minister of Defense Serdyukov, and that performance was played just on the background of this visit, only confirm this idea.
So summing — influence of Belarus and Our homeland and the European Union may, but is unlikely to improve in the direction of Belarus-US relations. Is only if the administration’s policy Medvedev will radically different from Putin’s policies, as long as we can not judge. " Tags: Our homeland, Fyaduta usa, Lyalkov, Zlobin, Belarus

Like this post? Please share to your friends: