Belarusian ruler dissatisfied with Putin

Alyaksandr Lukashenka accused the Russian government of failing to fulfil “union” agreements.

Alyaksandr Lukashenka told during his working trip to the Mahilou region it is the Russian government that should be blamed for failing to perform agreements with Russia within the “union state”, Interfax reports.

“The presidents take decisions, but the government of Russia fails,” Lukashenka told journalists.

According to him, “everything we agree upon at top level, everything that is signed is blocked, not fulfilled.”

“If Russia starts blocking and keeping us away from its market, who then needs this so-called integration? What should we do in this case?” Lukashenka told.

The Belarusian ruler said the current problems in the bilateral relations would be considered at the nearest session of the council of ministers of the union state in Minsk. He also added head of the Russian government Vladimir Putin asked him for a meeting.

It should be reminded that prime minister Syarhei Sidorski blamed Russia for not performing anti-crisis programmes, and speaker of the “house of representatives” Barys Batura – of pressure to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia and failure of other integration plans. In such a way he responded to the recent statement by speaker of the Russian State Duma Boris Gryzlov who said it took too much time for Belarus to be prepared to recognize Abkhazia.”

Syarhei Sidorski said at a meeting with state secretary of the “union state” Pavel Borodin in Minsk ahead of the forthcoming session of the council of ministers of the “union state” that Russia slowed down fulfilling the anti-crisis plan denying access for Belarusian producers to the government purchases system in Russia.

“Rosselkhozbank doesn’t credit Belarusian equipment today,” Sidorski said.

Batura also blamed Russia for the fact it didn’t legally confirm “the agreements on paying for gas and cancel of punitive sanctions for undertake of planned volume of gas supplies”, and didn’t cancel oil customs duty that “contradicts the previously signed documents and the very concept of the union state”.