BELARUS ON THE EVE OF CHANGES?

Events in Belarus are closely intertwined with the influence of interested external forces and  increasingly turn to be a protracted crisis. Ongoing mass protests that began after the recognition of the incumbent President Alexander Lukashenko as the winner of the August 9 presidential elections make political reforms and, apparently, the transit of power inevitable. But what will be the character of this process in terms of foreign policy of Belarus? Currently it is practically impossible to guess the answer to this question, given the acute geopolitical situation unfolding in and around Belarus.

Lukashenko won't leave for no reason

Mass protests against the Lukashenko government continue for two months already. They are accompanied by reports of harsh suppression, beatings, arrests of opposition figures and ordinary citizens of Belarus dissatisfied with the current president's policy. The clashes even led to the death of several people, which clearly indicates the uncontrollable growth of civil unrest. The country is actually split, since the share of President Lukashenko’s supporters in the Belarus population is almost equal to the members of the anti-government coalition unwilling to see the incumbent president as the head of state for the years to come.

Lukashenko himself admitted that he "has been sitting in the presidential chair too long." However, he also made it clear that he will not leave for no obvious reason because "as soon as [he] leaves, [his] supporters will be exterminated." This statement also confirms a fierce internal political battle, which cannot be camouflaged even by the opposition's assurances of their intention to take the power exclusively by peaceful means.

Earlier, Lukashenko's main rival in the elections, opposition candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, was forced to leave Belarus and move to neighboring Lithuania amid a tough confrontation between protesters and the law enforcement. At the same time, on behalf of the entire opposition, she expressed her readiness to provide the incumbent president with security guarantees but only "if he leaves peacefully, humanely." At the same time, she assured that in case of Lukashenko's voluntary resignation "there will be no cardinal reshuffles", "many of government officials will certainly remain in their posts."

The actual response to this statement was Lukashenko's extraordinary political step - a sudden, or, as experts and media outlets call it, a secret inauguration. At the solemn event, he announced the failure of attempts to implement a “color revolution” in Belarus, while the Coordination Council of opposition forces continues to demand new presidential elections, as the results were substantially falsified, according to Lukashenko's opponents. As for the secretive nature of Lukashenko’s inauguration ceremony, Tikhanovskaya called it a farce, a confirmation that “Lukashenko’s previous powers are over, but the people of Belarus did not renew his mandate.”

However, the main thing in the current events in Belarus, of course, is not discussions on the prospects of certain politicians. In fact, the fate of the future configuration of power in Belarus largely depends on whom and under what conditions the well-known external centers, which have a critical influence on the development of events in Belarus, will support.

Tikhanovskaya on European stage

The West actually burned all the bridges in relations with Lukashenko, declaring the current head of Belarus an illegitimate president. Apparently, Euro-Atlantic circles will not consider Lukashenko the president of Belarus from November 5, when his tenure expires.

Remarkably, the European Parliament issued a resolution “in accordance with the position of the European Council, which rejects the results of the so-called presidential elections in Belarus on August 9, as they were held with flagrant violations of all internationally recognised norms”. At the same time, the EU Parliament recognised the Coordination Council of the Belarusian opposition as a “temporary representative of the people of Belarus” and supported the idea of holding new presidential elections. Protesting not only against “flagrant violations”, but also against the violent suppression of protest actions, the European Parliament called for the introduction of sanctions against Lukashenko and officials “responsible for falsifying election results and repression in Belarus”. The resolution also contains a request to the EU Council to freeze any money transfers to Minsk and stop issuing loans, including from the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. It is also proposed to increase funding for civil society institutions in Belarus: organisations advocating rapprochement of Belarus with the EU. It is noteworthy that the prime ministers of Poland and Lithuania - countries that are kind of locomotives of European influence on the processes in Belarus - signed a declaration providing for assistance to participants in Belarusian protests.

The participation of Svetlana Tikhanovskaya in the meeting of the foreign ministers of the EU member states became a clear demonstration of the readiness of the EU to denounce Lukashenko's legitimacy, since the single opposition candidate de facto appeared at the event as the legal representative of the Belarus people. Nevertheless, EU ministers failed to adopt a decision on sanctions against Lukashenko and the Belarus government officials. The adoption of decision was vetoed by Cyprus, which insisted on the adoption of a similar decision against Turkey, which currently faces opposition from Nicosia and Athens because of the hydrocarbon resources of the Mediterranean. Nevertheless, it is expected that sanctions against the Belarus authorities will be adopted at the EU summit scheduled for early October.

The US does not recognise Alexander Lukashenko as the legitimately elected President of Belarus either. The US State Department’s statement released soon after Lukashenko’s inauguration ceremony indicates that the US is committed to this position because “the August 9 elections were neither free nor fair, and the announced results were falsified and illegitimate”.

Western pressure was clearly observed at the meeting of the UN Human Rights Council. The adopted resolution called on the Belarus authorities to stop the violence, release political prisoners and hold a dialogue with the Coordination Council and the civil society. Tikhanovskaya addressed the meeting participants online, which caused an indignant reaction from China, Venezuela and, most importantly, Russia.

Obviously, Russia is a key geopolitical actor influencing Alexander Lukashenko. But Russia is influencing the situation in Belarusian because of its own strategic opposition to any sort of color revolutions in the former USSR. The Kremlin believes that this will certainly be followed by new attempts to squeeze Russia out of its traditional sphere of influence. Moreover, if pro-Western forces come to power in Belarus, there is a real chance of turning the country into a strategically significant outpost against Russia and its interests. After all, new Belarusian authorities will limit Moscow’s opportunities to rely on resources similar to those it used in Crimea and Donbass during the Maidanisation of Ukraine.

Putin's bet

Russia's determination to prevent geopolitical defeat in Belarus was confirmed by the visit of Alexander Lukashenko to Moscow. Russian President Vladimir Putin confirmed that Russia views Belarus as its closest ally, and Lukashenko himself as a legitimate president. At the same time, Putin supported Lukashenko's readiness to initiate the process of constitutional changes in Belarus.

The latter aspect is quite remarkable in the sense that Moscow, while expressing support for Lukashenko under the current circumstances, nevertheless makes it clear that it is dissatisfied with his previous stubbornness on a number of issues essential for Russia. The main issue is the accelerated integration of both countries. Yet Lukashenko had his own views on the issue willing to defend the sovereignty of Belarus. “I’m not a kid who worked as president for three, four or five years. I don’t want to ruin everything that I did together with you, the people, creating a sovereign independent state,”  Lukashenko said to Belarusian parliamentarians in December last year before his meeting with V. Putin.

Now it seems that by having highly appreciated the idea of a new constitution for Belarus, Russia is in principle ready to push Lukashenko to serious internal political reforms. But only to those which guarantee that Minsk remains strategically oriented towards Moscow permanently. In this sense, there is no doubt about the fate of the transit of power in Belarus. In other words, the essence of the battle between Russia and the West is not in the attitude to Lukashenko personally but in the approach to the transit of power, as well as its form and geopolitical content.

Thus, Putin’s support to Lukashenko gives the latter a chance to postpone his departure, but at the same time to ensure the inviolability of the pro-Russian course as a whole. After all, the Belarus president was the driving force of this course during all 26 previous years in power.

At the bilateral meeting, Putin and Lukashenko agreed a state loan to Belarus worth of $1.5 billion. Part of the loan is expected to refinance the old obligations of Minsk. Apparently, Lukashenko will agree on the free lease by Moscow of two military facilities in Belarus, including the radio center of the missile alert system and the zonal communication hub of the Russian Navy. The agreement ends next year. There is no doubt about the prospect of Russia's further use of such significant strategic facilities. “Only fools can think that Belarus has weakened, that we cannot stand, that Russia will step aside. We are able to keep the situation stable not only in Belarus, but also along the perimeter of our borders. You can rest assured of our reliability in terms of the defense of our common Fatherland from Brest to Vladivostok. Recent events reaffirm our commitment to stay together. In no case can they manage to drive a wedge between us," said President Lukashenko at the meeting with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu.

Are the plans on ‘common Fatherland’ between Russia and Belarus viable? Apparently, the very statement manifests Lukashenko’s firm reliance on Moscow. What does Belarus expect in the  future? Answers to these questions are very important because they determine not only the fate of Belarus but also of many deep political processes in the entire post-Soviet area.