If a situation is uncomfortable for a bureaucrat, the way-out is to ignore it.

Belarusan civil society was hoping for support and for a clearly defined stance of the EU in relation to Elena Tonkacheva’s case. The absurdity and political motivation of her deportation for the threat to public order because of minor speeding should be obvious for everyone, however… The fact that the Russian authorities are keeping silent can be understood; but silence of Europeans, for whom human rights are one of the pillars is bewildering.

The statement of solidarity with Belarusan human rights defender Elena Tonkacheva that was recently adopted by the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum was ignored by the high-ranking addressees. Belarusan civil society hasn’t yet saw an open and clear stance of the West on Elena Tonkacheva’s case.

Why? As Ulad Vialichka, the Director General of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, assumes, the reaction of the West could stop the procedure and random decision-making on Elena Tonkacheva’s case.

— The reasons why we don’t see this reaction might be different. First, politicians are often too busy to comment or react upon a quite individual situation that takes place in Elena Tonkacheva’s case, — ironically notes Ulad Vialichka in the interview with EuroBelarus Information Service. — This is the situation of a specific character; no arrest or detention happened, and administrative procedure can be difficult to comment upon.

Ulad Vialichka notes that he tends to “ascribe such inactivity to a bureaucratic character of modern diplomatic structures of the European Union that declare their values and aspirations, but in fact, prefer staying calm in this case and pretend that nothing is actually happening.”

— They prefer to preserve good relations with the Belarusan state; nobody wants to make any statements for this reason, so insignificant for them. I don’t know, perhaps someone from the officials raises this topic in some negotiations, but we don’t se that. But I got no answer to all my attempts to submit the information about Elena Tonkacheva to the embassies and the EU structures. From my point of view, it is disrespect of the whole Belarusan civil society.

— It appears that Belarusan authorities made a right Jesuitical choice when staking on excluding the Belarusan human rights defendant from the public life?

— Belarus-Europe relations today have Jesuitical character in general, not only in relation to Elena Tonkacheva. I see no thaw here that so many are talking about, and think that inactivity and lack of initiative that we observe today have to do with the retiring of serious politicians such as Sikorski, Bildt, Füle... This cohort was able to take clear political stance and wouldn’t disdain the issues of the civil society. Those who changed them at the position of Foreign Ministers and European Commissioners give really little attention to the problem of civil society strengthening in such countries as Belarus. In this situation the reins of power go to bureaucrats, who choose standstill. Political will faded into the background leaving space for bureaucratic rationalism.

— It appears that only colleagues-human rights defendants are reacting to that. Here is one of the recent news — Swedes from Östgruppen demand real reaction from their authorities.

— News about Swedes is a good sign. As civil societies of European countries will be heard sooner than we will. Belarusan civil society for the European officials is not a party to render an account for, while their civil society is also their body of electors, their public opinion. I think that this is the way in which the position of the bureaucrats can be changed. But we should note that Swedish civil society is the most progressive among European states.

— Doe sit mean that we don’t have anyone to hope for?

— We are not used to hoping for someone; we did everything that we could so that this question didn’t remain unanswered. If it remains so, it will mean that European politicians and bureaucrats somehow participate in Elena Tonkacheva’s fate, the fate of her organization and the fate of some part of the civil society. It appears that by keeping silent they in a way sign the documents about Tonkacheva’s deportation together with the Belarusan authorities.