The war in Libya and Belarus' relations with the West

What are the causes of the dual reaction MFA on the UN resolution on Libya and the beginning of the military operation against Gaddafi? How important is the fact that the military operation in Libya has the mandate of the UN Security Council? As the policy of the West in Libya could affect the behavior of the official Minsk? These topics in the "examination of Freedom" to discuss Doctor of Political Sciences Vitaly Silitski and Alexei Pikulik.

Drakakhrust: What can explain the dual response MFA at UN Security Council resolution on Libya and on the follow-up. At the beginning of Foreign Affairs through the teeth welcomed the resolution, saying that it will help deeskalyatsyi conflict. And when, in the development of this resolution the fighting began, the Belarusian side is condemned. Why? Alex.

Write Your Quote Here …

Pikulik: Lukashenko returns to his old discourse of anti-globalism. Therefore, he needs new friends in the Arab world, he needed to earn points for them. In the face of deteriorating relations with the West is the only logical point of view — to condemn military intervention, to condemn an attempt to establish the power of democracy and advocate for self-determination and sovereign decision of internal conflicts. I do not think that is the result of exposures Lukashenko that NATO troops will strike at Air Force Belarus.

Silitski: Yes no dual reaction here. No less a dual response to the Arab League and Russia, which also imposed sanctions against Libya, but protested against the military intervention.
Behind the wheels of the coalition, where the decision was made, no one expected that a decision on military intervention will be made so quickly.

Drakakhrust: But the decision was approved by the UN Security Council. And the "green light" was given to her by abstaining Russia and China.

Remember how Gaddafi himself relented after the fall of Saddam Hussein

Silitski: Well abstained. And that was — run ahead of the train? There is also a PR, there is a need to justify their actions to their own elites. For Russia, China and other countries, these actions are unacceptable — West again got involved in regime change. If you now retreat from Gaddafi, tomorrow will once again be somewhere uzryvatstsa aircraft, so it must somehow finish. On the other hand, the behavior of Gaddafi, such that stand up for him — not comme il faut. You need to select some middle line of conduct.

As for our government, remember, as Gaddafi himself relented after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. On the one hand it is necessary to condemn, on the other — you do not zaryvatstsa. Indeed, experience shows that if vchepyatstsa and not fall behind, it will be very bad.

Drakakhrust: The current situation is different from war in Kosovo in 1999 and Iraq in 2003, there were unilateral initiatives of the NATO alliance and the United States. Now the situation is similar to the situation in 1991, the first war with Iraq, when there was a UN Security Council sanctions. And Milosevic and Hussein, too, were not angels. But then the same Russia was categorically against the use of weapons and made it clear they would block a UN Security Council any decision that opened the possibility for such a scenario. Why?

Silitski: If Putin was president, then now would be blocked.

Drakakhrust: What is the impact on relations with the West will have this new war? You gave an example of how Gaddafi relented in 2003. Is there a chance that now Lukashenko also softened?

West is. And it must be considered. It is the power of

Silitski: No direct effect, an occasion on which a military force will be used against Lukashenko looks fantastic. But the situation shows that there are boundaries that should not move even a dictator. The second point — this is what has been a break in the promotion of freedom advocated by President George W. Bush. And many of the autocrats relaxed. Well, here is a new wave of revolution and revival killed, accident, scattered crisis and the internal contradictions of the West. West is. And it must be considered. It is force.

Drakakhrust: Alexey, you said that Lukashenko is not very afraid. the next — he said. But Gaddafi did just that, as recently threatened to Lukashenko — dropped troops on the "rebels." But it turned out that the troops not only Gaddafi is. This may be a lesson for the Belarusian ruler?

To any dictator will not say good-bye shooting at their own people

Pikulik: I hope so. In Libya, the world has shown that no dictator will not say good-bye shooting at their own people. This — the main message. If the world did not, any dictator would remain unpunished. It seems to me that the phrase Alexander Lukashenko, in which case it will use the army to the state, which he associates himself, it is a warning that it will not behave like Mubarak and Gaddafi both. On the other hand, I think that's a big mistake, that this phrase he frightened a significant part of their establishment, which will look for ways to enter into a dialogue with the West on their own. Such statements he brings his own political death, so the elite is not quite over it, she's not ready.

If you shoot, the case may not end visa and economic sanctions

Silitski: The personal letter of application Lukashenko army was absurd, as in Belarus have enough other units to perform such duties. They even quantitatively more, and they are more prepared for such purposes than the army. This is the path to suicide — display outside these units, which can not fulfill such an order. That said Lukashenko, you just have to read so that he would shoot. Gaddafi precedent shows that if the shoot, the case may not end visa and economic sanctions. Let him think.

Drakakhrust: Alexei, Vitali's recalled how in 2003, after the invasion of Iraq, Gaddafi agreed to pay compensation to the victims of the Lockerbie bombing, renounced nuclear weapons, although it then no one was going to attack. So maybe now Lukashenko does something like, say, the issue of political prisoners? If the West was not so weak, when he's on the march, it is not known where this could lead the march. It may, for example, the issue of economic sanctions will be decided now easier than it solved before the war in Libya?

The worst thing — Lukashenko feels that the West had cheated him

Pikulik: I do not think it will have a serious impact on Lukashenko and in particular to resolve the issue of political prisoners. Lukashenko feels relatively safe, because the West can do little at the intergovernmental level. Possible targeted sanctions by individual EU member states, but Lukashenko feels protected and the worst — it feels right, it feels that the West had cheated him. I believe that the current wave of repression started mainly because of the fact that Lukashenko felt cheated West. And as a vengeful man, he will now be strongly abut.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: