"Lukashenko Has Failed To Live Up To Expectations And Has Become Unnecessary"

Europe and the U.S. have someone to talk to Putin through.

"If there are people who have a personal and long-standing relationship with Putin, the question arises why additionally to bet on Lukashenko specifically," asks historian Alexander Friedman on Euroradio.

What is the meaning of French President Macron's call to Lukashenko? To use him as a source of information about Putin? Observer Alexander Fridman discusses this topic.

- This version seems quite logical to me. But I don't see any particularly significant results here.

If you look at the American experience, it's hard to say that it was extremely successful. I honestly don't know what really valuable information about Putin the Americans could have gotten from Lukashenko. It is also not very clear how actively they used him as a communication channel.

If we look at the recent development of Belarusian-American relations, it is obvious that everything started in the context of the Ukrainian topic. And this is not accidental. Suffice it to recall one of the key stages - General Kellogg's visit.

At that time, Kellogg was in charge of the Ukrainian direction, and John Cole, who today is Trump's special representative for Belarus, was his deputy. Therefore, when Kellogg was in charge of this direction, the main focus was really on Ukraine.

From the American point of view, Lukashenko was seen as a person who had direct access to Moscow and could be useful in the negotiation processes.

But if we look at the current stage of Belarusian-American relations, especially after Kellogg moved away from this topic and Cole became special representative, we see a somewhat different picture. Now we are talking more and more about bilateral relations, economic issues, possible agreements, and other practical topics.

I have the impression that today the Americans no longer consider Lukashenko as such an important channel of communication with Moscow as they did a year ago. Perhaps this channel has simply failed to live up to expectations," Friedman believes.

Then why should the Europeans repeat this path?

- The Europeans, of course, may also try to use Lukashenko to send some signals to the Kremlin. Lukashenko does belong to a very narrow circle of people who can call Putin at any time and get an answer.

But this is more of a technical function.

The question arises here: is this function really that unique?

For example, there is Gerhard Schroeder, who was recently in Russia. As far as we know, he was in Moscow, although there was no information about his participation in the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. It is quite possible that he held some unofficial meetings, handed over something and received something in return.

If there are people who have personal and long-standing relations with Putin, the question arises as to why Lukashenko should be betting on him.

So, theoretically, such a role is possible for him. But at present I do not consider him a particularly useful channel of information or a source of some exclusive insights," says historian Alexander Fridman.

You can support the website Charter97.org

MULTI-CURRENCY ACCOUNT FOR ASSISTANCE:

Bank's name: Bank Millennium S.A.
Address: ul. Stanislawa Zaryna, 2A, 02-593, Warszawa
IBAN: PL97116022020000000216711123
SWIFT: BIGBPLPW
Name of the account holder: Fundacja “KARTA ‘97”
Purpose/title of payment: Donation for statuary aims

You can contact us by the e-mail charter97@gmail.com