EU and Belarus are trying to clear out whether there is mutual interest in moving forward.

On 7-9 December an identification mission led by Mr. Mathieu Bousquet, Head of Unit for Neighbourhood East in the Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations, worked in Minsk. The mission was involved in “determining priority directions of cooperation for 2016.”

On 9-10 December a EU delegation led by Mr. Gunnar Wiegand, Deputy Managing Director for Europe and Central Asia (EEAS) and Ms. Katarina Mathernova, Deputy Director-General of Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations, also visited Minsk.

During the talks in the Belarus Foreign Ministry agenda for further realization of the program “European dialogue on modernisation with Belarusan society” (a new title “Dialogue for modernization of Belarus”) was approved.

What does the agenda for bilateral relations look like? What plans does the EU have in respect of sanctions? What fate is awaiting the agreement on visa facilitation?

Ulad Vialichka, the director general of the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, answers the questions of the EuroBelarus Information Service.

— What did the EU identification mission state: improvement, aggravation or conservation of the situation? It is only two months left before the decision on sanctions is to be made.

— The mission doesn’t aim at giving sudden assessment; its task is to voice the EU basic approach towards Belarus in the medium-term outlook to its Belarusan partners, both represented by the state as well as other interested parties (business, civil society). No assessments were given; the only opinion that has been voiced continually is the appearance of the opportunity thanks to some thaw in Belarus-EU relations in connection with the release of political prisoners and absence of tough repressions during the presidential campaign.

— What does the agenda of the “Dialogue for modernization of Belarus” that has been approved recently look like?

— The approach that the EU voices now is to increase the number of cooperation fields to a maximum. However, special attention and respect is still given to all components of the democratic development, human rights, supremacy of law, and anti-corruption policy, though tactically, the EU finds it reasonable to communicate with the Belarusan side on a broader agenda than it used to. Perhaps, this is the peculiarity of the current approach to the development of Belarus-EU relations.

 — The head of the EU Delegation Gunnar Wiegand voiced readiness to double financial support to Belarus for 2016, declared EU’s readiness to help with joining the WTO, and give additional lending on the part of the international institutions. Is it the minimum that the EU is ready to provide the official Minsk with here and now?

— I don’t think it’s the minimum, but I think it is the “bait” in case the bilateral relations are intensified. The EU is looking for the common ground, fields and problems, including those interesting for the Belarusan government. Since the interests of the Belarusan side are primarily economic, it is economic instruments that have political effect that are offered — in particular, stabilization of economic situation in the context of the situation in the region. But I wouldn’t think about Gunnar Wiegand’s statements as about ready-made presents: they are not presents, but opportunities given to the Belarusan authorities.

— What steps does the EU expect from the official Minsk?

— The agenda that is of mutual interest is being elaborated. Most likely, the EU Mission has come to Minsk with a set of offers that have been under discussion for quite a time. But it’s long due for these offers to become agreements or at least gain publicity. We have been hearing about the negotiation agenda for a while, but we almost know nothing about it. Civil society should at least know the set of questions in talks and even take part in them.

No new conditions for the Belarusan authorities are laid down; the former ones — release of political prisoners and absence of repressions during the elections — have been already fulfilled. The question is whether there is mutual interest in moving forward.

— A number of recommendations voiced by the EU Mission are already unfeasible: Lidia Yermoshina stated that revision of the electoral legislation contradicts the principles of the Venice Commission. Have Europeans reacted to the words of the Belarusan official?

— The EU wants to discuss the issue of electoral legislation alongside with the other questions. Yermoshina’s words might be an important signal; however, I would wait before drawing the final conclusions. The reaction on a number of questions is still unknown to us — thus, it was mentioned that the visa facilitation agreement is almost ready. I think we need to be guided by the reaction of the EU Commission by results of the whole round of talks that the EU Delegations held in Minsk.

— In your opinion, what fate is awaiting the agreement on visa facilitation? The document has been ready long time ago, but the sides just won’t sign it.

— I think that the fate will be the same as those of numerous questions that the Belarusan authorities are trying to sell for a maximum price. We will certainly see the agreement signed as soon as the Belarusan side finds the moment appropriate. It’s a certain bargain, where Belarus is trying to sell the agreement on visa facilitation for a maximum price. A certain situation, moment or offer are expected in exchange for which the official Minsk will sign it. Moratorium on death penalty also refers to the same kind of bargaining. I see no reasons to oppose to the fulfillment of this demand, but Minsk wants to sell the Moratorium on death penalty for a maximum price. We observe the policy of petty bargaining.