Hide And Seek Game

For almost three months, official Minsk and Moscow have been sharing documents in deep secret.

It is noteworthy that there is no information leakage. Even the usually well-informed Russian telegram channels or the well-informed Kommersant newspaper remain silent, as close as wax. The foreign ministers of both countries are trying to justify this with high state necessity. Sergey Lavrov recently said: “When negotiations are held, the negotiators do not go to the public every day, telling who offered what to whom.” Uladzimir Makei echoes him: “The time will come and everyone will learn about everything. Now there is a routine work.”

However, the problem is that to call “routine work” a situation when the fate of the statehood of Belarus is at stake is hardly appropriate.

Meanwhile, Russia, in addition to the stick (economic blackmail), is also actively using carrot. Here, Moscow, at the request of Minsk, recalls scandalous ambassador Mikhail Babich, replacing him with a seemingly peace-loving and extremely diplomatically correct Dmitry Mezentsev. Russian officials, using political mimicry, deliberately make things obscure, speak not the whole truth or no truth at all, try to hide their true plans. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said the following regarding the rumors of a united presidency and the possibility of V. Putin’s taking this post: “There is nothing in the “union agreement” that could lead to the speculation that its goal is to bring someone to the presidential throne.”

The statement of Vladimir Putin looks no less crafty. On June 7, at a plenary meeting of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, speaking about the Belarusian-Russian relations, he said: “Today there are no grounds for state unification, we have no such plans, neither goals.” At the same time he added that it is only about the construction of the “union state” of Russia and Belarus. But the trick or catch of the Russian president is that the implementation of the treaty on the creation of a “union state” means the state association. After all, in this case we are talking about the creation of a single government, the adoption of a “constitutional act of the union state,” the transition to a single currency. And this is the union, more precisely, even the absorption of Belarus by Russia.

In the same place, on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, Minister of Economic Development of Russia Maxim Oreshkin said that the issue of the single currency is being actively discussed, and, as you can understand, already in practical terms: “How to do it, in what time frame to do it”. Interestingly, the Russian side gives information about this, while the Belarusian government officials are trying to hide it. After all, the transition of Belarus to the Russian money automatically leads to a single monetary policy, tax policy, macroeconomic policy. That is, having lost its money, Belarus loses the possibility of an independent economic policy. Without own money, Belarus’s dependence on Moscow will be approximately the same as of any of the Russian provinces'. And Uladzimir Makei calls this “routine work”.

Belarusian ambassador to the Russian Federation, and now also a part-time Vice-Premier Uladzimir Siamashka, went even further. Speaking at the opening of the concert on the occasion of the Day of Russia on June 8 in Minsk, he said: “Now we are experiencing a crucial stage when we decide to move on within the framework of the “union state”... We state today that we must reach a new stage. Together we are stronger.”

However, the fact is that “it is possible to move further within the framework of the “union state”, “to enter a new stage” only on the path to the total liquidation of the Belarusian statehood. Until now, only Russian officials have used the rhetoric about “deepening integration”. Why is the Belarusian ambassador now singing along with them? It is not yet clear what this strange statement of Uladzimir Siamashka means. Is it just the demagogic rhetoric to appease the Russian allies, or the willingness to surrender to the mercy of the empire?

It must be said that recently the official Minsk in every possible way demonstrates Moscow its good will. We can recall the optimistic and cheerful statements of Prime Minister of Belarus Siarhei Rumas that the positions of the parties regarding the “program for further integration” coincide by 70%.

The very fact of authorizing Belarusian ambassador to Russia Uladzimir Siamashka with the powers of the Deputy Prime Minister for the activities of Belarus in the framework of the “union state” and relations with the Russian Federation is a political gesture towards Moscow. Say, that is what importance we attach to relations with an ally, we made a Babich out of Siamashka (in terms of the scope of powers).

In addition, over 300 Russian servicemen will take part in the upcoming parade dedicated to the Independence Day of Belarus. And the persistent refusal of Aliaksandr Lukashenka to go to Europe - all these are links of one chain.

However, at the same time, Minsk is trying to snap cautiously. Aliaksandr Lukashenka, visiting the Navapolatsk oil refinery Naftan on June 7, categorically stated that he was not going to sell it. Since the only buyers of the enterprise can be only Russian oil companies, it is clear where the message was sent.

In addition, he demanded to defend their interests in the course of negotiations with Russian suppliers on compensation for contaminated oil more vigorously.

From the statements of the ministers at the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Economic Forum it becomes clear that both sides note that all sore issues should be resolved in a package.

It turns out though that Minsk and Moscow have different packages.

Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Anton Siluanov said that until integration issues are resolved, it does not make sense to “pull out” issues of compensation for losses from tax maneuvers or issues of crediting Belarus. That is, first the unification of the two states and only then the continuation of subsidies to the Belarusian economy.

On the contrary, Minister of Economy of Belarus Dzmitry Kruty interprets this package differently. According to him, the issues of compensation for the tax maneuver should be considered in the energy package, in the context of the formation of single markets for gas, oil and petroleum products, and the electricity market. It should be understood that we are talking about the documents of the EAEU, according to which Russia has pledged not to worsen the conditions for the supply of energy resources to Belarus.

Dzmitry Kruty sees the problem of the single currency also in another way: “In the union agreement itself, it is stated that in the conditions of creating a single economic space in all areas, the single currency becomes the final”. That is, first the unimpeded supply of Belarusian products to the Russian market, the import of oil and gas at Russian domestic prices, and only then we will talk about the single currency.

And further. The ministers are to meet in Moscow on June 15, and the prime ministers of Belarus and Russia will meet on June 20. As a result of these negotiations, a document on the prospects for integration should appear.

It is sad that these momentous questions are discussed behind the backs of Belarusian and Russian societies, as in the Middle Ages, rulers defined the status of their principalities and kingdoms without the participation of their subjects.

Valer Karbalevich, Svobodnye Novosti