Belarus – European Union: Another thaw in relations

Dzianis Melyantsou

Summary

The year 2013 has brought hardly any breakthrough in the Belarusian-European relations: neither side would yield for the sake of their improvement. Nevertheless, the political conflict subsided significantly, partially due to intense diplomatic communication. By the end of the year, the agenda for bilateral relations for the nearest period was formulated.

Trends:

More communication

The year 2013 in Belarusian-European relations was filled with intense diplomatic work. The Belarusian Foreign Ministry held monthly meetings with ambassadors of the EU member states and the Delegation of the European Union to Belarus, and commissioned Belarusian ambassadors to the EU countries to inform the officials of the receiving countries about Minsk’s official position. Foreign ministers of Belarus and EU countries held a number of consultations.

In March and April, the Deputy Foreign Minister Alena Kupchyna paid two important visits to Paris and Brussels, where she met politicians and European functionaries to discuss the Belarusian-European relations. On May 6–7 she paid a working visit to Hungary, on May 17 she took part in the meeting of Foreign Ministers of the Visegrád Group and the Eastern Partnership in Cracow.1 During the meeting Ms. Kupchyna pointed out that Belarus is interested in developing pragmatic cooperation and suggested adopting a list of strategic projects of the Eastern Partnership and strengthening the business element of this initiative.

On June 12-13, Ms Kupchyna visited Vilnius to meet the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lithuania Andrus Krivas and Minister for Foreign Affairs Linas Linkevičius. On September 6-7 Alena Kupchyna visited Latvia to participate in the international Riga conference and a series of bilateral meetings with Latvian officials. After Riga, Ms Kupchyna paid a working visit to Great Britain to meet representatives of the British Foreign Office. On October 8 she visited Hungary and was received by the Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. During these meeting the sides discussed both bilateral relations and ways of improving Belarus – EU relations in general. Foreign Minister Uladzimir Makei also paid a number of important visits. On February 12–13 he took part in the second round of Informal Eastern Partnership Dialogue meetings (Tbilisi).

Commissioner Štefan Füle and Deputy Secretary General of the European External Action Service Helga Schmid, Mr. Makei spoke in favour of resolving problematic questions through dialogue.

He also reported that Belarus is interested in further involvement in the common European integration processes. Further diplomatic and political communication between Minsk and Brussels was fostered by the EU Council decision of June 24 to lift visa sanctions against Uladzimir Makei for the period of his office as head of the Foreign Ministry. This step was regarded by Belarus as an intention of the EU to develop bilateral contacts.

On September 12–13 Mr. Makei took part in the third round of Informal Eastern Partnership Dialogue meetings (Yerevan). During the meeting Mr. Makei made a number of statements on the necessity to follow the equality principle within the Eastern Partnership and to increase the practical aspect of the initiative – working on joint projects in the field of transportation, trade, the energy sector and border management. Alongside intensified Minsk – Brussels contacts, Belarus had more active communication with individual EU member states. On April 10, Mr. Makei had a working meeting with the Foreign Minister of Latvia Edgars Rinkēvičs. The sides might have agreed on further steps to improve relations. Mr. Rinkēvičs hinted at this during the EU Foreign Affairs Council Roundup on 22 April. Simultaneously, the town of Viciebsk hosted the signing of the intergovernmental agreement on the Belarus – Latvia border regime.

In April, Prime Minister of Belarus Mikhail Myasnikovich paid a very important visit to Lithuania on the occasion of the IX International Belarusian-Lithuanian Economic Forum. Nevertheless, central were political issues, including relations with the EU in general. According to Mr. Myasnikovich, during Lithuania’s presidency in the EU “Belarus must take advantage of this chance and move further towards normalizing Belarusian-European relations”. During his visit, on April 18, Mr. Myasnikovich signed an agreement on purchasing a 30% stake in the dry bulk cargo terminal in Kalipeda port. This stake provides a kind of guarantee for Lithuania that Belarus will transit potash fertilizers through its territory. It looks like the official Minsk is trying to secure Lithuania’s support in Belarusian-European relations.

In July, Uladzimir Makei visited Brussels to take part in the Eastern Partnership Foreign Ministers’ Meeting. In his speeches Mr. Makei stressed the firm position of Belarus on equal treatment of all members of the Eastern Partnership without sanctions and ultimatums. Traditionally, Mr. Makei reminded his audience that the official Minsk is ready for constructive cooperation in projects of mutual interest. During the minister’s meeting Mr. Makei proposed a number of projects concerning the energy sector, transportation and customs infrastructure. According to the information of the Foreign Ministry of Belarus, in Brussels Mr. Makei also had a number of bilateral meetings with the heads of the European External Action Service, the European Commission, the Council of Europe and some Foreign Ministers of the EU member states. In 2013, the Belarusian Foreign Ministry expressed its position on the EU initiative – the European Dialogue on Modernisation with Belarus (EDM). In late January 2013 European capitals received a non-paper where the Belarusian side expressed its views on further development of this initiative and conditions, under which the Belarusian government is ready to join it. According to this document, the official Minsk proposed transforming EDM into a Partnership on Modernization (on the model of the one between Russia and the EU); the partnership is to be an instrument for social and economic support in the first place; any help is to be based solely on the needs of Belarus and approved by it; the structure of the partnership is to be similar to that of the Eastern Partnership. Therefore, this proposal envisions if not total reformatting of EDM than starting a new, bilateral, dimension of communication on the governmental level without the opposition and the civil society. Another important event of 2013 was the Ministry’s statement that Belarus made a positive decision of accrediting the Swedish temporary Charge d’Affaires. After the scandal with mutual closure of embassies in August 2012 this step gives a positive impulse to Belarusian-European relations.

Nevertheless, the key event for the Belarusian diplomacy in the West is Belarus’ participation in the Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius, November 28–29.

The Eastern Partnership Summit: Belarusian surprise

The intrigue around Belarus’ participation in Vilnuis EaP Summit continued until the very last moment. Some observers forecasted that Belarus’ full participation would have been conditioned by the significant improvement in the human rights situation and release of at least some political prisoners. As a matter of fact the previous Warsaw Summit in 2011 ended in Belarus’ demarche due to underrepresentation. Nevertheless, this time the European diplomacy decided to abstain from discriminating measures toward the official Minsk despite the lack of significant improvements in the sphere of human rights and democracy.

On October 15, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Lithuania Andrus Krivas sent out invitations for the November summit to all diplomatic missions of the EaP participant states. According to the FM of Lithuania, the invitations were for the countries as a whole, not for specific officials. This approach was welcomed in Minsk and contributed to Belarus’ representation on the highest level and full participation in the summit’s work.

In his plenary speech the head of the Belarusian delegation Uladzimir Makei spoke on the necessity of equal and indiscriminative relations. In his speech, he outlined three ‘false choices’ that, according to the minister, the EU puts before its EaP partners: ‘their own development model or the EU model’, ‘take it or leave it’ (“partners should equally work out rules and models of the partnership”), and ‘West or East’.

To the summit organizers’ joy, Makei stated that Belarus is ready to start negotiating visa facilitations and readmission agreements with the EU “on conditions of a constructive attitude from both sides”. This statement, together with the planned initialling of the Association Agreements with Georgia and Moldova, became one of the few positive achievements of the summit. It was especially prominent after the failure to sign the association agreement with Ukraine and the abrupt turn of Armenia’s foreign policy toward the Customs Union.

The final Declaration2 of the Summit in Vilnius also reflected the yearning of Belarus and the EU for more constructive relations. It speaks about “the important contribution of Belarus to Europe’s energy security by providing significant energy transit”, it supports further dialogue between Minsk and Brussels in the field of energy and the active involvement of Armenia and Belarus in the EU’s nuclear stress tests. The participants “noted the enhanced bilateral sectoral dialogues between the EU and Belarus on issues such as economic and financial cooperation, the environment and education”. The declaration restated that “the EU remains engaged in a European Dialogue on Modernisation with Belarusian society and that exchanges are ongoing between the EU and the Belarusian government with a view to determining the best future form of cooperation on modernisation issues”.

It should be noted that at the previous summit in Warsaw (2011) the European participants adopted a separate Declaration on the situation in Belarus, in which they called for the release and rehabilitation of political prisoners and expressed their concern at the violation of human rights in the country.3 Due to proactive actions of the Belarusian diplomacy the participant countries did not sign this declaration. Over the last two years the situation has changed significantly and the EU is making attempts to find a different approach to the official Minsk.

Another sign of Belarus’ positive reception of the Summit in Vilnius was participation of the Minister of Economy of Belarus Mikalai Snapkou in the Eastern Partnership business forum. The official Minsk from the outset initiated the institutionalization of the business forum because this format better corresponds to Belarus’ vision of the idea and purpose of the Eastern Partnership in general. Therefore, the key result of Belarusian diplomacy in the European direction in 2013, including the result of the Eastern Partnership Summit, was formulating the agenda of bilateral relations for at least the coming year. Starting from the presidential election 2010 there has been no such agenda. At the moment there are plans to negotiate agreements on visa facilitations and readmission and launch consultations on the potential EU assistance in modernization of Belarus.

Subdued rhetoric

During the year the degree of anti-European rhetoric from the highest Belarusian functionaries was gradually subduing. Neutral was the message during the yearly address of President Lukashenko to the Belarusian people and the parliament as well as his statements during visits to the regions. The Belarusian president spoke about his intention to establish friendly relations with the EU on conditions of equal treatment and absence of double standards from the side of Brussels.

Before the Eastern Partnership summit Mr. Makei gave a large interview to the Polish weekly Dziennik Gazeta Prawna,4 where he stated that Belarus joining the EU in the future is not ruled out. He noted that a dialogue with the EU is being conducted in “an open but informal way”. But this dialogue could not be promoted by sanctions and pressure.

As for the sanctions, on October 29 they were prolonged for another year, but the list of people and the number of companies was changed: 13 names and 5 companies were excluded, but 5 new names were added. By doing so Brussels showed its flexibility, which evoked a quite reserved reaction of the Belarusian Foreign Ministry.

Absence of pointed anti-European rhetoric from the official Minsk came nevertheless side by side with persistent emphasis on existence of double standards in the EU attitude to Belarus. With this propagandistic goal the Foreign Ministry issued a report titled “Violation of human rights in some countries in 2012”. According to the authors it is aimed at “drawing attention to violation of human rights in the countries that refer to themselves as ‘developed democracies’”.

The EU, in its turn, was also decreasing the grade of criticism of the Belarusian authorities; this topic started to lose its urgency against the other events in the region (especially those in Ukraine). Nevertheless, Brussels did not gave up its main demand – release of political prisoners.

On September 12, the European parliament passed the report on the situation in Belarus presented by Justas Paleckis.5 The main conclusion of it was that, despite the reduced number of politically motivated arrests, the atmosphere of threats and repressions prevails. At the same time MEPs called the executive bodies of the EU “to encourage dialogue with those functionaries that took no personal part in repressions to promote Belarusian-European cooperation”. The report underlined that Lithuania’s chairmanship in the EU and the Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius should be used to promote relations with Minsk and resume political dialogue. In the sphere of economics the report suggested constructive technical dialogue on macroeconomic development and finance.

Conclusion

During the year intensive diplomatic contacts helped to clear up positions and expectations from both sides but did not result in drastic changes on the Minsk–Brussels vector. The earlier harsh rhetoric subdued, which, on the one hand, indicates lower interest of Brussels in ‘the Belarusian issue’, and, on the other hand, reflects the yearning of the official Minsk to improve relations with the EU before the Ice Hockey World Championship and the upcoming presidential elections. After the EaP summit in Vilnius and its preparatory stage for the first time in several years the agenda for the Belarusian-European relations has been formulated.

In 2014, the relations between Minsk and Brussels are going to concern visa facilitations and readmission; there are going to be consultations on modernization on the intergovernmental level, technical dialogue on economic, financial, transport, border protection and other issues. If Minsk compromises and releases political prisoners, there might be a discussion of the basic agreement between Belarus and the EU, which will replace the Agreement on partnership and cooperation signed in 1995, which has still not come in force.