Analysis
Belarus withdrew from the Eastern Partnership (EP) summit in Poland on Sept. 30. The Belarusian delegation said it was leaving the summit, held in Warsaw at Poland’s initiative, because of “discrimination,” though the more likely reason is that many of the summit’s EU participants met with Belarusian opposition figures and denounced Minsk for democratic and human rights issues.
Belarus’ withdrawal is a reminder that Poland has far to go in achieving concrete results via the EP, but an offer from Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk that links financial assistance from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to reforms in Belarus shows that Poland has not completely given up on the country just yet.
Belarus’ prospects in the EP were weak even before the summit began. Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko was unable to attend the summit, as he is under an EU travel ban as part of sanctions enacted by the European Union against Belarus after disputed elections and a subsequent crackdown on the opposition in December 2010. Belarusian Foreign Minister Sergei Martynov refused his invitation to the summit, and Belarus sent its ambassador to Poland to the meeting instead. The ambassador was not allowed to participate in several events because of his lower rank (every other EP member state was represented by its president or top leader). The Belarusian Foreign Ministry reacted by releasing a statement that participation in the summit “is not possible as a partnership cannot be based on discrimination.”
But a more important factor was the prevailing attitude toward the Belarusian opposition. Several European leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Tusk and European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, met with Belarusian opposition leaders during the summit and denounced Minsk’s treatment of them. Tusk urged the Belarusian government to “release all political prisoners,” and Merkel said “things are going backwards in Belarus.” These actions likely were the real reasons for Belarus’ withdrawal from the summit. The European leaders’ actions do not reflect well on Poland, whose reputation is pinned to the EP, and in fact serve the interests of Russia, which has its own plans for Belarus.
The withdrawal from the summit does not mean that Belarus is distancing itself from the EP completely. As of this writing, Minsk has not left the initiative altogether, and the EP’s leaders have not indicated they plan on ejecting Belarus from the group. Indeed, Tusk stated at the summit that the IMF and the European Investment Bank (EIB) could give Belarus $9 billion in economic assistance if the Belarusian government commits to making “wide-reaching democratic reforms.” It was also said that Lukashenko’s ouster was not a precondition for such assistance.
Although Poland has offered financial assistance to Belarus in exchange for reforms before (and Lukashenko snubbed those offers), it is notable that Tusk is now linking reforms directly to a potential IMF loan. Belarus has had difficulties gaining access to IMF funds, though Minsk could certainly use the money. Poland knows this and is trying to use the possibility of an IMF loan as leverage. Though Tusk’s offer likely will not motivate Lukashenko to change his ways in the near-term, Belarus’ reaction will be worth watching as the country’s financial woes continue and Minsk finds itself increasingly isolated from the West both politically and economically.
