Well, now Belarusan National Platform of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum is undergoing tough times; however, if the motivation of participants increases and work over its image will be done, it will come back to work.

Let us recall that at the Report-and-Election conference of the Belarusan National Platform (BNP) of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum (EaP CSF) that took place on June 25 a lot of discussions were held around the issue of expediency of BNP’s existence at all. According to Uladzimir Matskevich, the head of the Board of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus“, judging by today’s situation Belarusan National Platform should be dissolved.

Her opinion on the vital capacity of the BNP in the talk with the EuroBelarus Information Service shares Natalia Yerashevich, the head of the Secretariat of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum.

“True, National Platforms of countries-members of the Eastern Partnership are not always heard in Europe, but at the same time CSF is now, basically, the only information channel of our opinion to the EU. That is why I believe that we should value National Platform as an instrument.”

At the same time Natalia Yerashevich notes the inequality of Belarusan National Platform’ development in different countries of the EaP:

“Different platforms, of course, have different dynamics. For instance, Georgian National Platform is cooperating with the ministries at a regular basis and with the government of the country in general. Georgia and Ukraine create bilateral groups for implementation of EU Association Agreement, and the role of the civil society is increasing even more. So it is not very clever to lose such instruments — the Forum and Platforms; though, of course, it is a right of a civil society in every separately taken country of the EaP initiative.”

Natalia Yerashevich also recalled that in the near future the format of the Eastern Partnership will be reviewed — the initiative is included in the European Neighborhood Policy:

“It is one more opportunity for the civil society to inform the European structures. On in all, I believe that the National Platform is the most important instrument of the EaP SCF, despite the presence of the Steering Committee and working groups. And even though the working conditions in Belarus are not the best one, potentially the National Platform has very large chances for success since even with such conditions European partners are willing to work with the civil society. As soon as the conditions are changed for the better, the Platform could be used to the full. For example, for the trilateral dialog — between the civil society, the state and the EU structures. We need to increase the motivation and the image of the National Platform’s participants — and it will come back to life after first successes, attracting new participants.”