The president of Ukraine makes a big mistake by asking the Belarusian dictator to be a mediator.
Vintsuk Viachorka, a member of the organising committee of the Belarusian Movement and former head of BPF party, said it in an interview with charter97.org.
– Petro Poroshenko asked the Belarusian dictator to use Belarus as a mediation venue to resolve the crisis. Why did the Ukrainian president do it knowing about Lukashenka's strong dependence on the Kremlin?
– I think we see the results of the campaign on creating an impression that Lukashenka has an independent position on Ukraine and the Ukrainian-Russian war. On the one hand, he received Oleksandr Turchynov and attended the inauguration of president Poroshenko, and Belarusian television was not speaking about the Ukrainian-Russian war for a long time apparently to avoid clear definitions. But concrete steps do matter. The concrete steps are voting of Lukashenka's representative at the UN General Assembly as Vitaly Churkin wanted; the deployment of Russian combat aircraft at Belarusian aerodromes; discriminatory measures against Ukrainian goods. We should pay attention to these steps. Unfortunately, Kyiv does not want to notice them. It deludes itself. By the way, I think both Kyiv and Brussels have illusions that it is possible to turn Lukashenka into an independent dictator. It is a systematic mistake. I am sure Lukashenka's decision to be a mediator was approved by the Kremlin dictator.
– What can the Belarusian ruler propose at the talks if he is at the leash of Moscow?
– As I understand, Lukashenka doesn't play any role. He just formally gives the venue for the talks. But it is a rather serious means to strengthen Lukashenka's image, which has worsened lately. In this sense, it is profitable for Moscow, because it has absolute control over him. We see from Makei's latest interview on STV channel that Minsk has the pro-Kremlin and anti-West rhetoric. In this sense, it is profitable for Moscow that the venue, which functions can be extended, remains under Russia's control and that the international community and Kyiv regard it as neutral.
– What other benefits can it bring to the Lukashenka regime?
– He already has benefits. For example, the visit of Linas Linkevicius that was approved by Brussels and creation of illusions that 2008 may repeat without prospects for being solved by the year 2010. They create illusions that the policy of swinging on the imaginary swing fixed to the Kremlin can be converted into political and financial aid from Europe and the West.
– Can this behaviour of Ukraine and the EU towards the Belarusian ruler facilitate the release of the remaining seven political prisoners?
– Kyiv doesn't require that the talks venue should have a clean reputation. Linkevicius paid a visit without setting conditions to release all political prisoners. I don't think it will facilitate their release.