But now it is of great importance for Kyiv that Belarus stays being neutral in Ukraine-Russia confrontation, as Ukraine fears escalation of conflict and a full-scale war.

On June 7 Alexander Lukashenko visited the inauguration ceremony of the fifth president of Ukraine, impressing Kyiv with his escort consisting of 11 cars.

Up to the morning of June 7 Belarusans didn’t know who would be representing Belarus at the inauguration ceremony of the newly elected Ukrainian president. Some expressed apprehensions that Lukashenko could reject the invitation in solidarity with his “friend” Putin, who wasn’t invited. However, Lukashenko went to Ukraine himself. It is remarkable that Ukrainian capital cheered Lukashenko with “Long live Belarus!” shouts.

Why did official Kyiv invite Lukashenko to the inauguration? What does his visit to Kyiv mean? How is official Minsk going to build relations with the new Ukrainian authorities?

Uladzimir Matskevich, the head of the Board of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, answered the questions of the EuroBelarus Information Service.

— Despite the prognoses, Lukashenko arrived at the inauguration of the fifth Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko. What made Lukashenko head for Ukraine?

— What prognoses are you talking about? It is right in compliance with his interests that Lukashenko had to attend the inauguration, which he did. The regime is making money on the Ukrainian crisis now, and is going to make money on Ukraine’s overcoming the crisis. He even voiced his own prognoses about the probable Belarus-Ukraine trade growth. Besides, Kremlin’s policy in relation to Ukraine is frightening Lukashenko; he is demonstrating loyalty to the new Ukrainian authorities; he met with Turchinov, and will be establishing relations with Poroshenko.

— Kyiv invited Lukashenko to the inauguration, though it is well aware that Belarus is Russia’s satellite and translator of Kremlin’s policy. What do the new Ukrainian authorities stake on in relation to Belarus?

— I happened to read different thoughts about the moral side of inviting Lukashenko to Poroshenko’s inauguration. It is naïve; we can’t judge politics by philistine views. Lukashenko ought to have been invited to Kyiv, and he has been invited. Ukraine didn’t introduce sanctions, it is not a member of the EU, it still preserves membership in the SIC, and Lukashenko is persona grata in Kyiv. Lukashenko voiced his positive attitude towards the provisional government and Ukraine’s actions in the crisis several times; he recognized the election of the new president as legitimate and recognized the illegitimacy of Yanukovych.

I came to hear a paradoxical opinion: democrats from Belarus went to Maidan, but it was Lukashenko who got invitation to the inauguration. It happens in politics, when the risks and even life bear one men, and laurels are won by others. I think that Ukrainians are grateful to Belarusans for the support of their revolution. Moreover, we have to take into account that Lukashenko is popular with some part of Ukrainians, who see him as an alternative to all former leaders.

As to the official stakes, it is of great importance for Kyiv that Belarus stays neutral in Ukraine-Russia confrontation, as Ukraine fears escalation of conflict and a full-scale war. I think that neither Poroshenko nor any other sensible person have illusions about our regime and its independence from Russia. However, if Russia uses Belarus’ territory for the extension of provocations, sabotage and war, it will be disastrous for Ukraine. It would be too naïve to skip the fact that Ukrainian authorities will do everything possible to prevent Belarus’ involvement in the war. And during the postwar restoration of economy intensification of economic as well as other relations with Belarus will be needed.

— Which role does the official Minsk play in Belarus-Ukraine-Russia triangle?

— There was one important detail which was disregarded in the news about Lukashenko’s visit to Kyiv. When journalists asked Lukashenko about his attitude towards Ukrainian eastern politics, he answered that he doesn’t know about such politics, and when Ukraine works it out he will be able to access it. I think that this question touches upon an important issue — the renewed Ukraine still has to elaborate the new eastern policy. And a lot will change for Belarus after this policy is introduced. If Ukraine and Belarus manage to coordinate their eastern politics, Russia’s rule will be over. Until it is done, Russia will stay in command in the region. It is worsened by the fact that Belarus is used by Russia against Ukraine. For now cooperation with Kyiv is not considered as an alternative to what seems the only choice — Russia, but Minsk is starting to have certain doubts. And it is for the future of Belarus-Ukraine relations that political and diplomatic war is going on now.

— Lukashenko promised to double Ukraine-Belarus bilateral trade in five years: from 6-7 billion dollars to 15 billion. Is new Ukraine ready to have economic relations with Belarus and shut its eyes to the dictatorship that is ruling in Belarus?

— Ukraine wasn’t ready for the war; neither it was ready for the association with the EU. I’m not undertaking the responsibility to evaluate the scale of the bilateral trade; but Ukraine will certainly need a lot of money for restoration and modernization. And even now the fight for the distribution of this money is going on. Both oligarchs, Kremlin and Lukashenko are expecting to make a profit out of this money.

Ukraine will be cooperating with Belarus despite the dictatorship that is established in our country; there can be no doubts about that. However, the question is whether the new authorities will be able to efficiently restore and reform the economy, overcome corruption and the established order in all state institutions and business entities. I can only wish good luck to the new president!

— Ukrainians didn’t hiss off Lukashenko; quite the contrary, the crowd was chanting “Long live Belarus!” Belarusan leader was talking sense in Kyiv: about Ukraine’s integrity, the necessity to fight for Crimea and even advised Ukrainians to “return your president” Yanukovych. The problem is that Lukashenko is talking sensibly to everyone but for Belarusans. What is the reason for Lukashenko’s “double identity”?

— As I have already said, Lukashenko is popular with some circles in Ukraine. We have to take into account the fact that domestic views never coincide with the foreign views, even if the country is as close as Ukraine. Foreigners, who Ukrainians are for us, however close our nations are, tend to extend attitude to the country to its president. We shouldn’t trust Lukashenko’s words; we should only trust his actions. And we have to understand and interpret them, as they affect the interests of our country and our nation.

— Lukashenko is always trimming his sails to the wind and giving the audience the information that it wants to hear. “We will always be with you” to Kremlin, “we are brothers forever” to Kyiv and “there will be no Maidan” to Belarusans. Still, he always remains the translator of Kremlin’s policy. Is he satisfied with the role that Kremlin gave to him or he is merely unable to get away from the dependence on Russia?

— Lukashenko is Kremlin’s puppet, though he is extremely dissatisfied with this role. But he doesn’t know how to get rid of it; all his independence doesn’t extend the bounds set by Kremlin.

Besides, Lukashenko has no allies that he could rely on when considering an attempt to get rid of it. The EU won’t help him; Kazakhstan doesn’t need him as an ally. Can it be Kyiv? Lukashenko might be thinking it over now, too. Still, these are only guesses and I can’t treat them seriously.