Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 12 – In the case
of Belarus, the Kremlin has become hostage of its longstanding policy of backing
whoever is in power among its CIS allies, Vladislav Inozemtsev says. That has
given Alyaksandr Lukashenka the opportunity to act as he likes with apparent
impunity.
But that policy needs to change at
least in the case of Belarus, the Moscow economist says, because Europe is not
going to embrace Minsk anytime soon and because any leader who did replace
Lukashenka could be counted on to be more pro-Moscow than the current incumbent
president has been (echo.msk.ru/programs/personalnovash/1925324-echo/).
Indeed,
replacing Lukashenka by one means or another would not only be a sign of
strength rather than weakness as far as Russia’s position in Belarus is
concerned but would also give Moscow greater leverage over other CIS countries
by reminding their leaders that there is a limit to Russia’s patience and that
the Kremlin will look to alternatives if it feels so inclined.y
The
current back-and-forth between Lukashenka and Moscow has crossed a line, the
analyst says. Lukashenka has shown himself too free in his words and too
demanding of Moscow for the latter to “completely satisfy” him. Indeed, according to Inozemtsev, “Moscow shouldn’t.”
It has already poured too much money down the drain in Minsk.
The
clearest indication of this is that Vladimir Putin’s press spokesman for the
first time ever mentioned in public just how much assistance Moscow has provided
Belarus over the last five years. In the past, Peskov has acknowledged
difficulties in the relationship but not put a clear price tag on them.
For
too long, Inozemtsev continued, Moscow has always supposed that “the indicator
of its influence is the success of the preservation of a specific leader in
power in this or that country of the Commonwealth of Independent States.” That gives those leaders, if they are so
inclined, incredible freedom of action, a possibility that Lukashenka has
exploited once too often.
Some
in Moscow think the Kremlin has no possibility of doing anything else because
Europe will come to Belarus’ rescue if Moscow tries to crack down too hard. But
that misreads the situation, the economist says. Europe will help individual
Belarusians, but it won’t help Belarus against Russia.
Once
that is recognized, Inozemtsev says, it is clear that “today, Moscow has an
enormous degree of freedom of action” and that a failure to exploit it would be
a “stupid” mistake. Russia should stop
subsidizing Belarus until Lukashenka is replaced, and it should make clear that
it will help again only after he is gone.
And
in seeking to push Lukashenka out, the Kremlin can be certain that he will be
replaced by someone prepared to be more cooperative with Russia and not in any
case “a radical opposition figure or pro-European. Replacing one technical ruler with another would
be a show of force by Moscow and not a manifestation of weakness.”
In
short, the economist suggests, although he does not use these words, Moscow
should approach its neighbors from a position of “Russia first” rather than
simply being a status quo power for CIS countries and their rulers. That might prove disruptive in some cases,
but such a shift would serve notice to all concerned.
Inozemtsev,
of course, is not part of the foreign policy establishment in Moscow. But his
words should not be ignored not only because he is one of the most thoughtful
economic commentators in the Russian capital but also because he has repeatedly
demonstrated that he has good connections with those making foreign policy
there.
And
to the extent what he is suggesting is the view of many of them, Putin may be
under some pressure to move more quickly and decisively against Lukashenka than
many in Belarus and the West may think. If that happens, the next few weeks or
at most months could be filled with dramatic developments not only in Minsk but
in other CIS capitals.
No comments:
Post a Comment