Showing posts with label November. Show all posts
Showing posts with label November. Show all posts

Friday, November 7, 2014

Ukraine Cannot Win Alone!


November 7th, 2014
 
Ukraine cannot win alone

The Belarusians and Ukrainians are natural allies in the struggle against Putin and Lukashenka.
Coordinator of the civil campaign European Belarus Dmitri Bondarenko and editor-in-chief of charter97.org Natallia Radina visited Kyiv to take part in the press-conference held by the information agency Glavkom and moderated by head of its press-center Natalia Malinovskaya. According to Bondarenko and Radina, Belarusians and Ukrainians are natural allies in the fight against Putin and Lukashenka.

- How would you comment Lukashenka’s role in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict? We know that you are skeptical about Lukashenka’s contributions as a “peacemaker”. Have you changed your opinion after your arrival to Kyiv?

Natallia Radina: No, I haven’t. It would be a great mistake to expect something from Lukashenka, simply because Ukraine’s new government were elected in a democratic manner, while Lukashenka is a dictator. In the country where his dictator regime rules politicians are murdered, political prisoners are kept in jails, prisoners of consciousness are tortured. Dmitri Bondarenko here spent a year and a half in a Belarusian prison, he can tell you more about it.

It is weird that democratic Ukraine chooses allies like Lukashenka. Don’t forget, Lukashenka is Kremlin’s marionette. He lets Russia keep its troops and weapons in Belarus. He is a very dangerous and cunning neighbor, not an ally. In the situation when Russia and Ukraine are at war, he is looking for certain dividends for himself.

- Is it Lukashenka’s time to shine now when Europe is willing to cooperate with him?

Natallia Radina: A similar situation already happened in 2008 during the Russian-Georgian war when Lukashenka was selling his position on Southern Ossetia and Abkhazia to Russia and Europe at the same time. He didn’t recognize these territories as independent states, and in return he got loans from the EU which saved his dictator regime from a collapse. The economic situation in Belarus was catastrophic back then.

- Today Ukraine suffers attacks by Russia. Is it plausible that Lukashenka will change the way he treats dissidents if he realizes that he can be the next victim?

Dmitri Bondarenko: Unfortunately, this is an illusionary hope. The dictator will remain, while people who we hoped would become democratic leaders leave. One of the reasons behind this are the mistakes in foreign and home politics. I mean Lukashenka’s lobbyists Mikhail Saakashvili and Viktor Yuschenko.
Unfortunately, during the past 20 years we have been through that many times. New diplomats and foreign ministers arrive to Minsk. Nearly all of them naively hope to change Lukashenka, but you cannot change someone who is so determined to keep their power at any cost.

At the same time, Lukashenka’s regime exists at Moscow’s expense. The financial aid from Russia, such as low oil and gas prices, combined with debts that the regime will never pay back, amount to 5-10 billion dollars annually. While previously the Russian empire in the form of the USSR could support dozens of pseudo-communist regimes at once, today its resources are enough for only one “brotherly” dictatorship. Russia cannot do more, and Lukashenka takes advantage of this situation.

- Given that Lukashenka will never change, can there be a Belarusian Maidan?

Natallia Radina: There will certainly be a Belarusian Maidan. Ukraine’s example has showed that regimes like Lukashenka’s or Yanukovich’s leave no other option of power transmission. The question is when the Belarusian Maidan will happen. But it is obvious that even Belarus will see an escalation.
However, there is one problem: the Belarusians are fooled by the Russian propaganda. Russian TV-channels are broadcast all over Belarus. During two decades, Lukashenka has been destroying independent media, and today we suffer the results of his politics. Basically, today the Belarusians trust Russian media more than the Belarusian propaganda and consider Putin to be a lesser evil than Lukashenka.

- This is actually very sad…

Natallia Radina: I would not put it this way. Masks are off. The way Putin’s regime treats Ukraine demonstrates their imperial nature and ambitions. There is hope that Europe will finally wake up and realize how dangerous the situation in our region has become and how close the world is to getting a new USSR, or even worse – a new Russian Empire. Putin supports the marionette regimes of Belarus, Southern Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria and is trying to install a similar regime in Ukraine.

- I am not convinced that Europe will ever wake up. Half of the countries there have been bought, some are too engaged in their games, and some simply don’t care because they are only minor players on the global stage.

Natallia Radina: But let’s not forget about oil prices, a crucial factor.

- Let’s hope so. I often say that the Ukrainian events show the entire world how not to do. We are trying to build a new Ukraine, which is why I would like to hear a third opinion about the mistakes that we have already made when building the new country?

Dmitri Bondarenko: As the majority of normal people around the world, we admire Ukraine, your people’s courage and will that you have showed at the Maidan and in the struggle against the direct aggression of Russia.

During the collapse of the USSR it was clear that communism is bad, and that we need to help the countries that want to get rid of this ideology. Today, Ukraine is a lone fighter, which, too, can be seen as a mistake. Charter97.org and other independent Belarusian media built an incredibly strong interest for Ukraine. Hundreds of our activists were at the Maidan during the “orange” revolution and at the Euromaidan in 2013-2014.

What has each Maidan given us? Ukraine’s new leader hugging with our dictator, something that would never happen in the times of the Polish Solidarnosc. Poland transmitted the light of freedom on other countries, and new Polish leaders worked with dissidents from Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Eastern Germany. Poland showed a strong political example.

What do we see in Ukraine? We see Maidan leaders hugging with dictators and having business relations with dictators. Real-politik in action. Yushchenko’s friends were Kaddafi and Lukashenka. With such actions, your powers trigger periods of depression in Belarus.

During the Maidan, official Belarusian media poured loads of dirt on the Ukrainians who rebelled against the dictatorship while the democratic powers took the Maidan’s part. However, when Ukrainian leaders come to power, they tend to forget about Belarusian democrats and bow to Lukashenka. Why isn’t any of them speaking about our political prisoners? Why does the country that has signed the Association Agreement with the European Union lets an EU-blacklisted person across its border?

This is the mistake. Ukraine cannot win alone, even with all its might and tragedy. Our countries have been together for thousands of years. Together we were suppressed by the empire, together we should free ourselves. Only a free democratic European Belarus can be a friend of free democratic Ukraine.

Should we bet on the dictator? This is a test for us. Where is Saakashvili? Where is Yushchenko? They say that Poroshenko has to put out the fire. His predecessors, too, had to “put out the fire”, but a quick look at the recent statistics shows that tobacco supplies from Belarus to Ukraine grew 40 times. Can there be a connection to your open borders with the EU? Supplies of alcohol grew 8 times.

We are not trying to criticize your home politics, the purpose of our visit to Kyiv is to check what we can learn from the Ukrainians. Moreover, we want to remind that the control over the power should include both home and foreign affairs, because a cooperation with dictators affects the free Ukraine’s image.

- The negotiations in Minsk will continue, won’t they? It will take months until the conflict in the East is settled. It is impossible to cut off all diplomatic contacts between independent Ukraine and the dictator.

Dmitri Bondarenko: there is one simple thing. When Poland’s foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski or German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle came to Belarus, they met with representatives from the authorities and the opposition. When the leaders of the new government (and previously - the leaders of the “orange” government) visit Minsk, they never meet with Belarusian democrats and families of the political prisoners. It causes huge reputational damage.
It is true that now in the wartime Minsk offers a platform for negotiations; however, European democratic politics should follow certain standards.

Natallia Radina: Speaking about Minsk as a platform for negotiations, we can clearly see that all agreements are simply disregarded. I have heard different points of view, some meaning that Belarus was the only place to meet because the separatists cannot travel to Geneva and Kazakhstan’s government refused to act as an intermediary.

However, who is it that Kuchma is negotiating with in Minsk? Putin’s puppets? This is completely meaningless. Putin is determined to continue his aggressive politics. For him, the negotiations in Minsk are a little break before the next attack.

- Who benefits most from the negotiations in Minsk?

Natallia Radina: Definitely Lukashenka. This person has always been an international scapegoat. Previously he used the Russian-Georgian war and now he is using the Russian-Ukrainian war to pop up to the global arena as a jack-in-the-box. Lukashenka has deeply rooted psychological complexes. For him, it is crucial to be a politician of a global level. And he exploits your tragedy to 100%.

Trust me, he doesn’t give a damn about Ukraine or the Ukrainian people. Just look at what he is doing: every public statement that comes from Lukashenka is full of contradictions. In one sentence, he praises Ukraine; in another, he gives compliments to Russia. This deep split makes him a political puppet led by the Kremlin puppeteers. Trust me, he will betray Ukraine whenever it is in his interests.

Moreover, Lukashenka has made Belarus a transit and smuggling zone that European goods cross on their way to Russia avoiding sanctions. In fact, he earns tons of money that land in his pocket. For Lukashenka, it is crucial to have the status of a “negotiator” and “peacemaker”, although in reality he is a businessman who earns money on the Ukrainian blood.

- Indeed, the image of ”dictator-peacemaker” is something new. The world hasn’t seen it before… Soon it’s time for elections in Ukraine. What is your evaluation of our electoral campaign?

Dmitry Bondarenko: despite all the problems and the ongoing war, Ukraine is transforming into a democratic state. We envy you. In Belarus, independent media disappeared for a long time ago. The majority of Belarusians hate Lukashenka and are tired from this life, but without media, the communication is one-way.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian society is alive. We see your electoral campaign in the streets and in the media. Of course, different media can have different angles and different stakeholders, but this is democracy. We want to wish you luck. The situation in Belarus is different.

I hope that the new Supreme Rada will be better than the present because your powers will change completely. This is crucial for Ukraine, both nationally and internationally. The country will have a legitimate president and a legitimate parliament. You have civil control over the powers. This is a huge step forward. Ukraine is a regional power with a huge potential. I would like to see your spirit of freedom spreading to Belarus and other countries.

Natallia Radina: I hope that Ukraine’s new parliament will be more selective in its contacts than the previous Supreme Rada, and that they will not begin with establishing a relation with the illegitimate Belarusian parliament. Don’t forget that there are no legally elected deputies or parliament in Belarus. Lukashenka has destroyed and subordinated all power institutions in the country. The Belarusian “national gathering” is a puppet structure. In other words, my message to the new Ukrainian deputies is to establish contacts with the democratic Belarus, not with the dictatorship.

Friday, November 22, 2013

The Abduction of Europe

  • Sannikov: "It could be said that Europe created Lukashenko, and Lukashenko created Putin's Russia." (Photo: Marco Fieber)

BRUSSELS - The slowing of democratic development is becoming increasingly evident around the world. Freedom House reports that fewer countries now guarantee all political and civil rights and freedoms than just a few years ago. This worrying retreat of democracy has been going on for more than five years.

This is largely due to a change in attitudes towards promoting democracy in the US and Europe.
There is a growing perception that democratic Europe is turning its back on the very principles it is based on; even the emotional connection to recent history, the history of fighting for freedom, for European values, is becoming weaker. 


Promising past

The success story of European unification is no longer a political guiding light. However, it's worth reminding that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe wasted no time in turning its back on the former empire to join NATO and the EU.

Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, and Romania joined the EU. Reality exceeded the boldest of forecasts for the democratic world, for progress and human rights in Europe. The dream of a Europe whole and free became reality for much of the European continent. In the 1990s, it still appeared that the constituent republics of the former Soviet Union, or at least those in geographic Europe, would follow suit. This was the best time to create and develop democratic institutions in the European portion of the Soviet Union. Indeed, many Western NGOs came to Belarus, Ukraine and Russia at that time to help develop civil society. However, for different reasons they failed to achieve any lasting success in these countries.

Early in the new millennium, Europe needed US support, including support for accession of new members to the EU, and was aligned with the US foreign policy, which was based on the core premise of promoting democracy above all. Europe and especially Eastern European states that reclaimed its European identity benefited from this solidarity on principles.

The entire Former Soviet Union (FSU) is now in full retreat, away from democratic values. And Western NGOs and their local partners are under the greatest pressure ever in all the years of their operation in the FSU nations. NGOs have been declared "foreign agents" in Russia. They have been "enemies of the people" in Belarus for years.

There is a clear danger of Russia becoming a totalitarian state. Totalitarian tendencies are on the rise in Ukraine as well, even as it is negotiating to sign an association agreement with the EU. It is not a “civilisation choice” of Ukraine that is being negotiated but an arrangement to accommodate the interests of an authoritarian ruling elite in Ukraine.

Disappointing present

Currently the US is distancing itself not only from promoting democracy in general but also from the process of promoting democracy in Europe. Going back to the "security paradigm" that de-emphasizes concerns for human rights and democracy lead to the US having a working relationship, sometimes very close and friendly, with the majority of non-free countries around the world. This is why the "Arab Spring" came as a great surprise to the US, creating problems for the US, the EU, and the world. No matter what provoked the nature was revolt against tyrants that were partners of the West.

Europe is now repeating this mistake. It has started sliding back into the Realpolitik mode of 20th century, dating from an era of two opposing systems, two different ideologies. This is a policy based on fallacy. It is a path that is harmful for the EU and a path that will lead to outright betrayal of democratic movements in nations living under authoritarian regimes or dictatorships.

One of the arguments behind this policy is the false premise that Russia is resisting Western influence and doing everything to oppose it and that the EU must therefore discern any signs of opposition to Russia in other FSU nations, and help support this opposition.
The key error here is thinking that by supporting these regimes against Russia the EU is weakening their ties with totalitarianism.

In reality the fact is that the FSU nations have created an alternative development model and are now building upon it, with Russia as the heavyweight in the region, and with help of Western Realpolitik. Whatever differences some of the FSU nations may occasionally have with Russia, turning a blind eye to the nature of their regimes and supporting them just because they are from time to time at odds with Russia is lethal for values and for the future of those countries.

Under this policy, the basic values Europe stands for and is based upon tend to take second seat to Realpolitik considerations. Geopolitical rivalry once again comes to the fore, which results not only in reneging on one's principles, but also in strengthening and legitimising the totalitarian regimes.
The totalitarian government model is currently much more appealing than Western-style democracy to the ruling groups of FSU countries. They have chosen this development path and are never going to adopt Western democratic ways by their own choice. Why should they?

At the moment issues like human rights and democracy can be excluded from meaningful bilateral trade relations. They can always reach a deal with Europe that is monetarily profitable to both sides. Liberalisation and democratisation will cost them power. At the same time there is little cost to them for failing to comply with international obligations and to change under current EU policy and huge risks to their dictatorships if they do change.

Post-Soviet totalitarianism has taken things much further than the Soviet Union ever did. The former superpower at least had some respect for national borders. It opposed the West in the Third World, rather than on the enemy's home ground. In Western Europe, the USSR used “conventional” methods of espionage, attempts at propaganda and support for local communists.

Things are very different today. Post-Soviet totalitarianism has found Europe's weakness and is increasingly trying to impose its own rules of engagement in Europe. This may not yet be a conscious strategy, but the scale and effectiveness of this “abduction of Europe" are truly impressive.

Dangerous future

It all began with significant investment in the Old World. Post-Soviet nouveaux riches became welcome in Western Europe. At first, they simply came over for a short holiday, to party and enjoy "European" life, while gradually coming to understand that they did not have to adapt to unnecessary convention, as their money was dazzling to the citizens of the EU.

Businessmen and politicians from the FSU started buying up real estate, moving their business to Europe, or at least putting them under companies in European offshore zones. They began buying sports clubs and entertainment venues on the Continent. The experience of those early weekend trips to Europe came in handy, and proved a great eye-opener. Huge amounts of cash began flowing west and huge amount of lawyers were hired to justify it, explain it and arrange for its deposit in western banks.

Business interests from all FSU countries currently have a presence in all European countries. London, which many of the Russian super-rich call home, is a prominent example. On the face of it, this would all be perfectly normal, even progressive development, if wasn’t for the fact that business interests across the FSU have no respect for laws and rules of the game accepted in the West.

These business interests bring their grey schemes of making money to Europe, making a "quick Euro" or a few hundred million quick Euros without proper control and while following corrupt practices. They also actively lobby EU member states, especially their policies in respect of FSU nations.

Business interests need lobbying, and this was precisely what post-Soviet businessmen and EU politicians started engaging in, acting through European politicians and members of parliaments and other legislators. The Latvians lobby for relaxing constraints on Belarusian petro chemicals, many of which are exported through Latvian ports. Former German Chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder joined Gazprom in the midst of its energy wars with the West.

The next level of infiltration of Europe was through the media and think tanks. After several failed attempts to set up or support NGOs in the West that would promote pro totalitarian propaganda, Russia and several other nations simply started buying analysis, journalists and media personalities, who could use their full knowledge of Western sensibilities and mind-sets to promote the interests of totalitarian regimes and dictatorships. The television channel Russia Today is a prime example of this. Native English speakers and pundits are hired as presenters to present pro Russia news in perfect English.

Expensive PR agencies are more than happy to see totalitarian regimes of the FSU among their clients, going to great lengths to make sure human rights violations in these countries are overlooked in Europe. Lord Timothy Bell and his PR agency eagerly came to serve Lukashenka government to lobby its interests in the UK and in Europe.

The push-back from the FSU is strong. The opposition to a EU Magnitsky law is a prime example of this with the EU being afraid to pass an act for fear of derailing its relations with Russia.
Dictators around the world are watching closely. They happily note that the Court of Justice of the European Union has accepted the claims of the blacklisted representatives of the dictatorial regime in Belarus who pose as journalists or election committee officials as well as some oligarchs who serve the dictator to be removed from the list.

Not only accepted but even ruled to pay the lawyers of the criminals that goes against European values. We also see the Zimbabwean tyrant Robert Mugabe filing a multibillion-dollar lawsuit over the losses suffered from EU Sanctions. Frightfully expensive European lawyers will now try to prove in court that destroying one's own country and one's own people is a tyrant's inalienable right. That'll be quite a precedent.
European democracy is increasingly becoming a product for purely domestic consumption. It is in full effect in the EU, where politicians, journalists, government officials and ordinary citizens alike are more than happy to benefit from it, and it grinds to a halt at the EU’s boundaries.

Democratic principles prevail inside the EU: independent courts protect human rights from encroachment by other individuals as well as governments. Outside the EU, one can conveniently forget about principles and deal with dictators.

The policy that Vaclav Havel described as "the sinister experience of dictator appeasement," is now called a "policy of engagement." This is precisely what the EU is offering Lukashenko, the man whose regime is responsible for disappearances and murders of opposition leaders, journalists, mass human rights violations, as well as destruction of national culture, history and language.

It all started in Belarus

The abduction of Europe started with Lukashenko. The foundation of Europe's last dictatorship was laid in Belarus precisely in the 1990s when Europe lived through its best period of great expectations, enlargement and common values. Lukashenko achieved a successful coup d'etat (disguised as a referendum) and assumed total power in 1996.

The EU responded by suspending relations with the regime, hoping that the next election would be fair. Popular opposition leaders who enjoyed broad support were murdered in 1999: Gennady Karpenko, Yury Zakharenko, Victor Gonchar. 

Every one of them could have won an election against the dictator. The EU did not respond to that. The Council of Europe conducted an investigation years after the murders. In the meantime, the dictator was building, consistently and methodically, modern Europe's toughest totalitarian system in Belarus. 

All FSU regimes, notably that in Russia, carefully studied the approaches and methods tested by the dictator in Belarus. They did not simply study them, they also adopted the "best dictatorship practices" for their own use.

It is abundantly clear how Lukashenko's practices are currently implemented in Russia. Among other things, Russia is watching how quickly Belarus can patch up its relations with the EU after yet another, more vicious spat.

It could be said that Europe created Lukashenko, and Lukashenko created Putin's Russia.
The experience of the Belarusian dictatorship shows that after any flare-ups with the West, after putting down peaceful demonstration, putting more political prisoners into jail, someone will come forward in Europe to defend the bankrupt Belarusian regime, and appeasers would be found domestically, who would join efforts to make the EU to revert to the Realpolitik mode.

A united Europe, with active involvement by the US, would have been a guarantor of restoration, reinforcement and development of democratic values, principles, and standards in the post-Soviet region. This is necessary for maintaining the Transatlantic partnership, for FSU nations, and for Europe itself. However, this is not happening.

And now Europe is in the throes of a very real crisis of values, which will hit it, much harder than any financial, mortgage lending, or foreign exchange crisis. The essence of the crisis is precisely that the EU does not see its mission to strengthen and develop democratic values. It believes it can maintain its own institutions and values untainted and engage and trade with its undemocratic European neighbours at no cost to itself. This is a mistake.

No "Realpolitik," no amount of "engagement" and overtures towards dictators are going to create predictable, safe neighbours for Europe. Dialogue and engagement with these regimes legitimises them and lets them into the EU where it is the EU’s systems and values that corrode. Remember, there are fewer free countries in the world than five years ago.

Only a direct, honest, uncompromising assessment of the dictatorship's actions, only an honest, strong, and brave stance in response to human rights violations by oppressive and dictatorial regimes, and bold support of democratic movements should help Europe defend its values and avoid new conflicts and a real “clash of civilisations”.

Andrei Sannikov is a Belarusian opposition politician 
and a former presidential candidate and political prisoner. 
---
 http://euobserver.com/opinion/122187
---