Linas Linkevičius: There can be no compromises for the Belarusian authorities

Demagogy and manipulation around the Belarusian nuclear power plant are unacceptable.

This was stated by Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevičius in an exclusive interview to Charter97.org. According to the Foreign Minister, the policy of his country against Belarus will not change with the arrival of a new government.

- Lithuania is already run by a new government. Are priorities of Lithuania with regard to Belarus changing?

- Main directions remain the same in all aspects. Continuity – this is one of the features of our foreign policy for many years. There is no exception, whether it is the Euro-Atlantic course, Eastern policy or relations with neighbors.

- Now we are seeing the main problem – it is the construction of the NPP in Ostrovets. Sharp statements in this regard can be heard. Minsk even says that „there are no such news on the Belarusian NPP that not be good news for Lithuania”.

- I want to clarify that. We have talked long and patiently about that and we will continue to talk. But we still cannot explain what we exactly demand. And we do not ask for something special, our demands are consistent with international norms and standards. This is first.

Secondly, I do not understand why our neighbors are being nervous. We have repeatedly noted that the choice of the assessment of this station was electoral. I mean the numerous visits of the IAEA experts. The IAEA comes not on its own, but only on the basis of invitation, and it examines only those segments, that are pointed by the owners. For example, site selection – is the main reason, in our opinion, why it all went the wrong way. From the very beginning, the construction has not been compliant with the standards. Before the beginning of the construction, it was necessary to coordinate all standards, also with the neighbors.

There are other issues, such as impact on the environment, but the most important one – is a choice of the site. There are appropriate teams of IAEA experts, six modules and among the top – site selection. This was not done. We demand that at least they do this now. Plus seismic characteristics, etc. A team that came worked not on the first four modules, but on the other modules. I'm not an expert and I do not encourage everyone to strike into this subject so much, but I'm just giving an example that when experts are considering a narrow segment and assess it positively, our neighbors make general conclusions that everything is fine. And when we doubt, we are reproached for not being impressed by the good news.

Patience has its limits, and this good news will not impress us, because it is just a manipulation. And it is a conversation of a deaf with a mute. And there will be no concessions.

We have shown many times that if our neighbors have progressive steps or aspirations – such as engaging in a dialogue, discussing visa-free regime, we are always on their side. We were among those who agreed that it was necessary to lift sanctions, when they released political prisoners. But at this moment there cannot be any games. Now there is a propaganda game. They spread false generalized findings and we are asked to compromise. There can be no compromises. Therefore, if the object is not constructed in accordance with the standards, we will adopt laws that will limit market access of the products made on this unsafe site. Our answer can be only like this, and we, of course, will convince our neighbors and the European Commission to do the same.

And it must be interesting and important to everyone, especially because we are now talking in 40 kilometers from the property and it is very sensitive. By the way, according to the IAEA standards, there should be plans for evacuation of large settlements (such as Vilnius) in the period of less ten two days. So there should also be such labor-intensive exercises. So, by any measure it is very sensitive and the fact that the nuclear power plant is built at a greater distance to Minsk than to Vilnius makes little difference. We protect everyone, including the Belarusians.

I would point out another important thing. Over the last year there were six incidents; we have learned about all of them from the press. Not from the original source. At first our neighbors denied those incidents, then they tried to present them in a simplified form. But this is also not acceptable. How can we approach the station in the future? We have heard the repeated statements by the country's leadership that the project will be completed in the fastest time, as cheaply as possible. It is also, incidentally, has little to do with security. Other criteria should be implemented. So, if someone is nervous there, then I would advise them to look at themselves, how they behave. Demagogy, manipulation of facts is unacceptable and will not be acceptable. I want to say that.

- Are you planning a meeting with your Belarusian counterpart?

- We plan, but what is the use of these meetings, if nothing changes? But, of course, we will meet, and I have met with them before. But most importantly, I am not a power engineer and I am not trying to be a specialist in the construction of nuclear power plants, I'm just talking about the general principles that are not respected. This is the essence of the whole problem. And we must talk about what really is, not what it seems.

- Recently, Speaker of the Lithuanian Seimas met the ambassador of Belarus. What are the priority issues that Lithuania is facing in relations with Belarus?

- A lot of questions. They are our neighbors, we have a common border of more than six hundred kilometers. This, by the way, the external border of the EU, Schengen, so we are interested that Belarusians could travel aboard more. Therefore, the negotiations between Belarus and the EU are very important. For a long time they were not carried out, but since 2012 - the end of 2013, when we held the European presidency, we somehow moved this issue forward. There is a big progress in regard to readmission, which is very important. It is abnormal that the Belarusians have to pay 60 Euros for a visa, while, for example, the Russians pay only 35 Euros. We want the Belarusians were free to travel and cross the border and we – are that window or door that may help them in this. In general, the dialogue with Belarus in regard to cooperation with the EU is very important. Belarus – is a member of the Eastern Partnership, a specific member, but, nevertheless, we are interested that all this will continue to be carried out also in the future.

- Lithuania has also concerns about the extradition of General Uladzimir Uskhopchyk. Is this question also raised?

- This question is raised, but, let's say, unsuccessfully. This is one of the issues that are difficult to work with. But I would repeat that it doesn’t slow down everything. Even though this is a fundamental aspect, this is not the reason not to talk and cooperate at all. On the contrary, we have always been for a change and progress. We are going through all of this, as it's our neighbor. By the way, Belarus for us is a critical economic partner, which is also very important. So the dialogue is multifaceted and is not blocked by something one. And I think all this will happen next, but, again, there are some fundamental issues and it seems that they will prevail in the future. It should not be like that.

- According to your observations, is Belarus in the agenda of international organizations and the EU?

- Maybe not very often, due to the fact that there are so many crises and other very bad problems, even in our region, but as far as I feel and know, there is a sincere desire that there have been positive developments in relations between the EU and Belarus in areas where it would be possible. What you are saying about the leadership – is not for us to choose, the Belarusians will choose themselves and no one is going to interfere.

- Except that assessing the quality of the „elections” ...

- This is European standards, there are observers who do not always make the positive conclusions. We do not recognize the „parliament” of Belarus, as the electoral process and the ability of political parties to work free is poor. We are not going to interfere in the internal affairs, we just have our own opinion and, if this opinion is not the same, it is not a tragedy. But the neighbors have to talk, so in the future we will be open for dialogue on those fields where progress can be seen.

- Recently in Belarus there was a decision on free five-day visas. What do you think of this kind of action?

- Our evaluation regarding benefits over the visa is always only positive. But we should notice, that these five days apply only to those who arrive by air. Probably there is no need to convince that this is not the main form of transport for our citizens and it is not relevant. Especially because we have been waiting for a response from the Belarusian side about the local border traffic for many years.

- Where do you see the cause of the fact that Minsk still postpones this agreement?

- Frankly speaking – I do not know. Even when I myself was ambassador to Belarus, I talked with the then Prime Minister Myasnikovich, asking him what we need to do to receive a positive decision. Moreover, all procedures from the Lithuanian side have been completed. Then it was said that there were no pretensions, but they just a need of a little time. This „a little time” is still going on.

And this would really be a breakthrough, as simplified regime would help people living fifty kilometers from the border to visit relatives, the Belarusians would be able to come to Vilnius and Druskininkai. It would be possible, but it is not taking place and I do not know why. So, when asked about the five-day visa-free entry – I am saying that it is a positive solution, but not a breakthrough. We expected more. And for a long time we have been waiting for those things that I just mentioned.

- You mentioned the Euro-Atlantic direction of Lithuania's foreign policy. Throughout the time that Lukashenka is in power, harsh statements about NATO could be heard. What do you mean by the Euro-Atlantic direction, if we are talking about Belarus?

- I just brought the foreign policy priorities of our government. And we know that not everybody is happy about this, but we do not always understand why. After all, it is not directed against anyone. We just want not to imitate, but to guarantee our safety and take this question seriously. And this, I repeat, is not directed against anyone, it is not and will not be offensive. But we will never tolerate what is happening around us, when European borders are redrawn by force. This is, of course, unacceptable.

- About security arguments. Belarus – is a close ally of Russia ...

- This is not surprising, as it is a federal state.

- Does it complicate the bilateral agenda?

- We talk to everyone on the basis of the principles of equality and mutual respect. Their opinions do not coincide in all points, and this is not surprising, but we notice that there is a very large integration between the two states. There is no common currency, but there is a military integration, especially in the field of security.

-Does Lithuania see this as a threat?

- We perceive this as a very serious issue. This, of course, is meant, since there is a concentration of weapons, military forces ... It is paradoxical, and it is not surprising that Russia usually blames the other. But if we compare the forces participating in the exercise, the concentration of the Air Force or heavy equipment – nothing to compare here.

- Do you ask your NATO’s colleagues about how they consider safety aspects associated with Belarus?

- In the context of security – it is a single region.

- What is especially distinguished in this case?

- In this case, I can only mention the dynamics of the military activities, which does not contribute to mutual trust, and intensity and number of exercises that are carried out without notice. Last year, NATO did not conduct such exercises at all, while Russia conducted 20 of them.

- You are talking about Russia, but the question was about Belarus.

- But we just said that this is the same segment. Soon teachings „West” will be conducted there and military equipment is already sent to Belarus. So, there is no big difference in the presence and deployment of military force.

- Does NATO realize the danger of the Suvalkai corridor?

- It is taken into account by those who are involved in military planning and military leadership. This term is already familiar not only to specialists. Everything must be taken into account at the time of crisis and tension. But we must avoid stress in order to be able to react a posteriori. We need to make sure that it did not happen.

- Belarus continues to be among the countries where human rights are violated. How does Lithuania view the current situation in this area?

- We have a lot of comments in this regard. They concern freedom of expression, activities of political parties, media, etc. The big step was the release of the political prisoners, which we welcomed and which contributed to the review of sanctions. It is good when there are some positive changes, but a breakthrough or revolution – is not happening in this area. We want that our actions, the dialogue between Lithuania and Belarus, between the EU and Belarus, lead to some progress. It is good If steps are made in a positive way, the most important that there were no movements backward. We want to make contributions in this regard. Although there are different assessments of the situation, the most important thing is that there is a positive dynamics.

- As for the port. Russia is trying to win over Belarus in the question of Ust-Luga port. How do you view this?

- It is always assumed. And we look at it this way: it would be further away and more expensive. There would be losses. Although these statements are political, I think that a pragmatic approach will win. Especially because the use of the Klaipeda port is profitable both for Lithuania and Belarus.

- We see that the Lithuanian business, especially after the introduction of counter sanctions by Russia, moved to Belarus. Enterprises are opening, but this is associated with risks. Are Lithuanian businessmen aware of these risks? Once a former presidential candidate Andrei Sannikov said that there were also Lithuanian businessmen in prison with him...

- Some of them are aware of that, everyone goes through their own experience. We openly talk about it, but business is still in danger. As far sanctions intensity is concerned, not only the EU sanctioned Russia, but also Russia sanctioned us, which, of course, has changed many vectors of business operations. Trade with the United States increased by three times, markets in China were opened up in other areas. Diversification has helped from the different side. And the business chooses on its own.

Some of them were unlucky, their things were not going so well, but I do not see any future changes in the risk level. In general, of course, it is profitable and natural when the neighbors trade and communicate with each other. Apart from the objective reasons for the cooperation, there is a certain level of risk, which not everybody understands.

- Former Ambassador of Ukraine to Belarus Roman Bezsmertnyi once called Belarus a stopper in the region between the Baltic and the Black Sea ...

- This stopper sometimes flies out , sometimes it is pushed inside by enthusiasts. It depends on the motivation.

- This is not the first time when the EU is trying to conduct a dialogue with Lukashenka. We know how it ended in 2010. Which approach currently prevails with the EU?

- It would be a mistake to build a wall and think that everything will be solved, because earlier there was a total isolation. But when isolating someone you isolate also yourself, depriving yourself of the opportunity to influence, communicate, talk and try to make a difference through dialogue. I'm always for contacts in this regard. And now they prevail. Until 2013 there was a tendency to isolate, now there is a tendency to work through contacts. And that also affects life.

- Apart from the nuclear power plant, what would be the nearest priorities in Lithuanian relations with Belarus?

- I would highlight the simplification of the visa regime. There was a significant shift in terms of simplification, so that our neighbors can freely travel around the world, at least in Europe. This trend would be important for everyone. And, of course, we need to continue the dialogue with the EU. It is not a primary issue, but it comes from the priorities of Belarus regarding the rapprochement with Russia. But I would like to see more tangible results in regard to the dialogue with the EU.

- Probably, it is really difficult to speak when the parties stand on the different positions of moral values?

- We just mentioned that the issue of visa-free regime is progressing, trade and economy is also working, in spite of the nuances or „stopper”. So you need to look selectively. But you cannot look selectively at the safety of nuclear power plants. However, we need to press those things where progress can be seen.