Peter Doran: Dialogue with Lukashenka leads to zero result

Sanctions against the regime of Lukashenka are shown to be effective.

Peter Doran, the Director of Research at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), had  an interview with charter97.org editor-in-chief Natallia Radizna.

Peter Doran is a co-author of the report “Democratic Change in Belarus: A Framework for Action” prepared by CEPA and Freedom House (US).

- You said that we need a plan on Belarus, a strategy on Belarus. Zbigniew Brzezinski also said in an interview with me that we needed a strategy. What a strategy do we need now? You are the author of one plan, one way. What's now?

I think what's needed to be done is that we need to communicate — both the United States and the European Union together. What our plan is for the future? This means to West all the good things that happen in the event that a political transition occurs in Belarus. This is at least the financial assistance, technical assistance, democratic, civil society, building assistance that the West is prepared to offer to Belarus in the event that a transition takes place. This has a number of benefits. That is a democratic future for Belarus. And we are prepared to help the people in Belarus to take on their own future in the event of the transition. Right now some work has been done on that, but not enough. And I think that United States and the EU together communicate a message that we can do a lot of good.

- In other words, we need a kind of the Marshall Plan on Belarus. And what about sanctions? The European Union doesn't want to continue its sanctions against Lukashenka. They want to have a dialogue. What a dialogue can be with the dictator? Will it be successful?

The tradition of engagement of an isolation is not proved to be effective in the past and I do not think that it will be effective in the future. I think that this approach that we have seen for the last two years of unifying a message between the United States and the European Union saying “this is a dictatorship, this is a not normal situation and we need to take steps to demonstrate our commitment to a democratic future for Belarus” is the right track. I think that the sanctions that both the United States and the European Union have adopted together is the correct course of actions so far. I think it is shown to be effective. But we need to make sure it is as effective as possible by illuminating loopholes. And that is a preferred option in my view because I think it shows that going back to engagement will produce the same results it has in the past – zero.

- Sometimes when we say about economic sanctions on oil products and potash European politicians say that they will hit people but not the regime. What do you think?

I think that the people in Belarus understand the sanctions are not directed against them. The sanctions are designed to provide a better future for them by producing a political transition in Belarus. If the people of Belarus understand it, then I would hope that leaders of the United States and Europe understand it is well. I think that the level of sanctions we've seen is good, but I frankly think that we need to find a way to sustain the unified message and unified policy that we've had over the last two years and to continue that in the future. What I hope what we don't see is a divergence in policy between what the United States is doing and the European Union is doing. That doesn't benefit anyone. And I'm encouraged by the close coordination we've seen between the United States and the European Union and I'd like to think it will continue.

- What do you think about the opinion that is popular today that if we have sanctions against Lukashenka, he will go to Russia?

In many ways Lukashenka has been forced to go to Russia not because of things we have done, but because of the policy he's done. Economic reforms have been frozen in time, political reforms have been put on hold. And the situation we see now in Belarus is the result of the decisions made over the last 15 years. That was caused Lukashenka to rely on Russia for assistance.

I want to envision a day when Belarus can begin to privatise its economy that provides new economic opportunities. So far without any additional economic transformation those opportunities don't exist. And so for both Russia and the EU and the US, what's needed is sustainable substantive and meaningful changes in Belarus, both economically and politically. And once we achieve that I think a lot of new options will open up for the people of Belarus.

- What do you think about the “Dialogue of modernization”, an initiative of the European Union?

If we learn one lesson from this entire region thought the post-communist transition, it is that partial, unfinished, haphazard economic privatisation programmes or economic transformation programmes don't work. They create asset stripping and they ultimately don't achieve the result you want. Conversely, in places were full-forced economic privatisation hand-in-hand with political reforms takes place, the greatest opportunities open up. Poland is one example of how privatisation plus political liberalization work. This is an important lesson. When countries fail to achieve that full-forced economical and political privatisation and liberalisation together, they underperform. That's not what we want for Belarus. That would be my advice for how to perceive it considering it must be done intended and otherwise it won't work.

- If the West imposes sanctions on Belarusian factories, will it save them from selling?

The companies which are currently under sanctions are own by the state and generate money that allows the government to continue to survive. I think that it is fully appropriate to send a signal that this is not an unacceptable form of government for Belarus, namely a dictatorship, and the government drives financial resources continuing to survive through these companies. And let's not forget that there are still political prisoners in Belarus. The crackdown has not changed. So if nothing is substantially changed in Belarus over the last two years, our policies should be flagged that they shouldn't change without change.