Martin Uggla: We saw in 2010 how dialogue between Lukashenka and EU ends

Any changes are harmful and dangerous for the Belarusian regime.

Martin Uggla, the head of Sweden-based human rights organisation Östgruppen said it in an interview with charter97.org, commenting on the statement by Representative of the EU to Belarus Maira Mora on resuming a dialogue between Minsk and Brussels.

– On the one hand, we need to speak about human rights and need a dialogue. On the other hand, results of the process are important. I am sure there are no opportunities to persuade the Lukashenka regime to stop violating human rights of Belarusians. This is a principled issue. Minsk must be urged to respect human rights. I don't think the dialogue that Maira Mora means can lead to it.

– Both Belarusian authorities and EU politicians were speaking about the dialogue between Minsk and Brussels in 2010. The talks ended on December 19 with the brutal dispersal of protests against rigged election results and the arrest of hundreds of people, including presidential candidates.

– There's a risk that the new dialogue will end in the same way. It is vital for the Belarusian authorities to show the EU that they are ready for negotiations. But we saw in 2010 how it ended. It could have been predicted, because the authorities of Belarus do not have a real desire to carry out reforms and changes in the country. Changes are harmful and dangerous for them.

– Your organisation said ahead of Maira Mora's statement that her actions do not comply with the official policy of the European Union. Do her words reflect Brussels' position on the issue, in your opinion? What policy should the EU Delegation to Belarus carry out?

– The main reason for our criticism of the EU Delegation to Belarus was the absence of consistency and a principled position. They say one thing today and another thing tomorrow. Maira Mora often demonstrated it in practice.

The Delegation of the European Union to Belarus should conduct the policy of the EU and represent its official position. As far as I know, it means the release and rehabilitation of political prisoners in Belarus and a call on Minsk on carry out systemic reforms in this area. I think the duty of the EU representative in Belarus is to promote this position. But we see that Maira Mora sometimes does it but sometimes not. It creates the impression of using double standards. If the position of Brussels changed, we need to contact them and demand explanations. When we do it, EU officials assure us all demands to the Belarusian authorities remain in force. It means that the EU Delegation to Belarus must adhere to this position.

It is significant that many famous people supported our demand to dismiss Maira Mora. It shows the lack of confidence in the EU Delegation to Belarus among Belarusians. It is very important for Brussels to solve the issue.