Ambassador Kenneth Yalowitz served as the US ambassador to Belarus between 1994 and 1997. He arrived in Belarus a few months after Alexander Lukashenka was elected president and witnessed Belarus sliding from a relative democracy into authoritarianism. Ambassador Yalowitz agreed to share his thoughts about what was going with Belarus in 1990s and the current situation.  BD: You observed the transition of Belarus from democracy to authoritarian rule – how did it happen? When we arrived in Belarus in 1994 there was still some hope. Lukashenka was elected on an anti-corruption platform. Western observers initially felt that he might be someone to work with.

Last month for the first time ever, the EU introduced sanctions against a number of companies, which supply oil refinery products to EU countries. It means that there is still a possibility of expansion of painful economic sanctions against Lukashenka's regime. There is no dominating opinion in the assessment of the possible effects of the EU sanctions' expansion and possible retaliatory measures of Lukashenka's regime. A more common opinion is that the EU, by introducing, for the first time ever, the sanctions against quite a large number of Belarusian companies, reached a certain line in its pressure on Lukashenka's regime, which it will not cross. It will not cross it because it is afraid of pushing Lukashenka into Russia's arms. This step will be followed by a period of long diplomatic maneuvers and backroom talks on the terms of resuming the dialogue.

​While Moscow has confirmed that those on the Belarus authorities' exit ban list will be unable to leave Russia either, official Minsk started to show willingness to release prisoners. It was also hinted that Belarusian Ambassadors to Brussels and Warsaw may return soon. Just in advance of this, Russia announced that it will be lowering the flow of cured oil to Druzhba pipeline and ship more crude to Europe via the BTS 2 terminal at Saint Petersburg. Belarus and Russia continue their “airline” conflict as well.  Belarusian civil society organisations peak this week with civic education events. Topics vary from leadership through assistance to HIV vulnerable groups to registration and security issues for civil society organisations.

Yesterday Russia's Prime Minister Vladimir Putin talked with Alexander Lukashenka over the telephone. On the same day Lukashenka announced at a meeting with Belarusian foreign policy officials that he may release some of Belarus' political prisoners. The relation between these two facts is unclear. However, this coincidence once again provokes thoughts as to Russia's real and possible role in influencing the Lukashenka regime. Over the past few weeks Russia has called upon the EU several times to lift sanctions against Belarus and start a dialogue with Lukashenka. This demand was made by Russia's foreign ministry, in a joint statement with Belarus and Kazakhstan, and in a joint statement by Medvedev and Lukashenka.

Over the last fifteen years Belarusians have become used to the authorities' brutality during opposition demonstrations. Since 19 December 2010 the police have been particularly repressive, leaving no opportunities for protesters. But the massive rally in Minsk on 25 March, Freedom Day, was unexpectedly peaceful. The police behaved in an unusually friendly manner. This led some commentators to conclude that a new political thaw might be beginning in Belarus. Unfortunately, such a conclusion looks groundless. The Belarusian regime sees the prospect of massive protests as a major threat to its power. Therefore it will take every possible step, including harsh repression, to prevent any form of revolution.   The Roots of Fear of Street Democracy

Belarusians and Lithuanians have a long common history which started long before the Grand Duchy of Lithuania 500 years ago. Two nations followed clearly divergent paths only after the collapse of the Soviet Union. When Lukashenka came to power, he recognised the state border of Lithuania and thus prevented the main source of possible tension between two countries.  Lithuania hosts many Belarusian exile organisations including the European Humanities University but remains cautious about economic sanctions.  It supports the liberalisation of the visa regime for Belarusians but was guilty of leaking information to Belarusian authorities which led to the imprisonment of human rights activist Ales’ Bialiatski. Two countries cannot agree on several issues, including Belarusian nuclear power plants, but overall their relations remain remarkably pragmatic. 

The flaring diplomatic breakdown between Belarus and the EU and closer ties with Russia have dominated Western press coverage over the last month. Analysts offer mixed views about the significance of the row for the geopolitical balance between the three parties. Breakdown in Belarus-EU Relations... The Economist argues that the EU strategy  is not working. It reports on the EU’s enduring inability to build a common foreign policy, and the internal blocks to decisive action towards Minsk: the Union even difficulty in agreeing on the list of people on whom to impose the travel ban.  It reports that many in Belarus continue their call for increased support for civil society from the EU in lieu of confrontation.

Last Monday, flights between Minsk and Moscow suddenly stopped. Russia has recalled the licence for flights to Russia from Belavia, the Belarusian national airline. The Belarusian side responded by cancelling the licences of the Russian companies. A new trade war between Belarus and Russia is brewing.  Although the flights have resumed according to the temporary agreement, the conflict yet again reveals the tough methods Russia employs to promote its economic interests in Belarus. As Belarus's conflict with the West escalates, Lukashenka feels unsafe on the Eastern front where Moscow is taking advantage of his weakness. However, this and other trade wars do not mean that Russia will decide to "civilise" the Belarusian ruler any time soon. A weak and isolated Belarus is an easy prey for Russian economic advances. 

Although Belarusian authorities permitted and did not interfere with the annual Freedom Day opposition rally in the centre of Minsk, the pressure against opposition activists is increasing. Multiple detentions leading to short-term prison terms are now coupled with restrictions on travelling abroad for pro-democracy activists. The life of political prisoner Siarhey Kavalyou who has been on a long hunger strike is in danger.  Pro-democratic supporters mark BNR anniversary with demonstration. An estimated 3,000 to 4,000 people took part in a “Dzen Voli” (Freedom Day) demonstration that was held in Minsk on March 25 to mark 94 years since the proclamation of the 1918 Belarusian National Republic (BNR). No arrests were reported during the demonstration, which had been sanctioned by the Minsk City Executive Committee. According to witnesses, police acted politely.

Although formally a member of the Eastern Partnership (EaP), unfortunately Belarus does not participate in any of its programmes. It is excluded from visa liberalisation, the EaP flagship initiatives, and bilateral track programmes: for example, the Small and Medium-Size Enterprise Funding facility with a €15m budget, or the Eastern Partnership Pilot Regional Development Programmes with an allocation of €75m. It is worth mentioning that for 2010-2013, in total around €350m have been set for the Eastern Partnership programmes. The Eastern Partnership programmes have been implemented since 2008, and during that time there has been a so-called period of liberalisation in Belarus. But civil society’s expectations of an improved situation have not been fulfilled. Minsk ignored the EU’s recommendations regarding democracy, the observance of human rights and an independent judiciary. Full cooperation with Belarus is impossible for Europe without political changes and the release of its political prisoners. 

The EU Council of Ministers recently introduced new restrictive measures against Belarusian businessmen and 29 companies that allegedly support the Belarusian regime. It is the first time the EU added so many Belarusian enterprises to its ban list. European politicians expect that it will help release political prisoners in Belarus. But in practise, it may lead to further deterioration of the human rights situation in the country and cause long-lasting distortions in the Belarusian economy. Both adherents and opponents of sanctions agree that political prisoners should be free, but they view differently how to  achieve this goal. While some experts emphasise the moral importance of sanctions, others believe that they are hypocritical and harmful. They think that the EU is losing its leverage in the country and forces its authorities and businessmen to deal more with authoritarian states such as Russia.

Prime Minister Mikhail Myasnikovich is a veteran of Belarusian politics. He served as Deputy Prime Minister of Soviet Byelorussia and then independent Belarus and was the key aide of Prime Minister Kebich, the main rival of Alexandr Lukashenka in 1994 presidential elections. In 1990s Lukashenka even promised to imprison him for corruption. But after being elected, the first president changed his mind and started to cooperate with him.  Having worked as the head of the Presidential Administration in 1990s and the National Academy of Science in 2000s, Myasnikovich became the Prime Minister of Belarus in December 2010. Many regard him as the shrewd and unsinkable leader of the Belarusian bureaucracy who is able to significantly influence the situation in the country.  

Two things are already certain about the September 2012 parliamentary election in Belarus. First, the ballot will once again be rigged so that the “right” candidates are elected. Second, the West will not recognise the elections as free and fair. The logical question, then, is why the Belarusian authorities still bother to organise elections and invite foreign observers to monitor them. Would it not be easier and cheaper to abandon elections altogether? Or at least, as the Head of the Central Election Commission Lidziya Yarmoshyna proposed a couple of weeks ago, not to invite "biassed" observers from the EU and USA. This is unlikely to happen because Belarusian elections play a crucial role for the internal legitimacy of Lukashenka’s regime.

The Belarusian expert community vigorously debated three topics last week: the EU-Belarus diplomatic conflict, the deepening dependence of Belarus upon Russia and capital punishment. EU-Belarus Conflict A Letter to a European Friend – Siarhey Dubavets uses physics terminology to make the point that by pressuring a substance, one cannot destroy it, but rather push the substance in any given direction. He argues that the EU policy of sanctions towards Belarus is pushing the country towards Russia instead of Europe. He questions why Europe is so focused on punishing the regime, forgetting to influence the people of Belarus. He thinks the most effective and cost-effective measure would be to open Europe to Belarusians and remove visa barriers.