19 March 2024, Tuesday, 10:35
Support
the website
Sim Sim,
Charter 97!
Categories

Konrad Pawlik: EU did not change attitude towards Belarus. It is Belarus that changes its policy

Konrad Pawlik: EU did not change attitude towards Belarus. It is Belarus that changes its policy
Konrad Pawlik
Photo by PAP

Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland Konrad Pawlik gave an exclusive interview to charter97.org.

The Minister answered the questions of the site editor Natallia Radzina.

- Minister, you're probably the youngest Deputy Foreign Minister of a large European country, and we're almost the same age. When I look at you, I realize how much Belarus has lost as a state and Belarusians as a nation. Why did it happen? In the early 1990s, we were in a similar position.

- In fact, there are several Deputy Prime Ministers in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs who are of the same age as me. This, of course, makes an impression on our foreign partners, primarily Eastern ones. I can assure you that the selection of Deputy Ministers takes place on only one basis - on the basis of competence.

I'm not quite sure that in 1990s we started at the same level. I mean Poland, Belarus and Ukraine. Economic indicators were certainly close enough, but it is not all that is needed for an effective transition.

Belarus and Ukraine were part of the Soviet Union for 70 years. The difference in the political, mental, social dimension was great. After all, the turning point of 1989 in Poland did not come suddenly. It was a long process: the protests in 1956, 1968, 1970, 1980-1981, Solidarity movement, a huge support from the church. Do not forget about the tradition of the national liberation struggle in the XIX century.

I understand those who regret that in 1990s in Belarus there were not radical reforms. There was even the opposite: many elements of the past regime and the political system were conserved.

I can assure you that we have always been willing to share our experience.

Belarus, like Ukraine, has been our priority country from the beginning. In the last 10 years, Poland has allocated EUR 250 million to the countries of the Eastern Partnership on a bilateral or multilateral basis. In particular, Belarus received 114 million, Ukraine - 90. This demonstrates the importance we place in Belarus and its people. I stress that a significant portion of these funds was spent on the projects of the democratic development.

There are voices saying that we must do more to help all the countries of the Eastern Partnership, but we must not forget that over 25 years we have gone from the recipient to the donor.

- The Solidarity won in Poland 26 years ago, and then the Berlin Wall fell, the Soviet Union collapsed. It seemed as if war and dictatorship in Europe were in the past. Why do we now again face the aggression of Russia and the risk of World War III?

- Events in Ukraine are another proof that the peace does not happen once and for all. And after World War I people thought there would never be second one, and after the Second World War, no one imagined that in Europe, after the reconciliation between the major countries, there will once again be a serious conflict - for example, the one in Yugoslavia in the 90s.

I do not want to draw any parallels and create catastrophic scenarios. I think that the collapse of the empire is always a painful process, and Russia, unfortunately, is no exception. Many European countries went through it. This is one possible explanation for what is happening in Ukraine.

- You are responsible for Poland's eastern policy. How do you assess the so-called Minsk agreement?

- At the moment, we have a more effective tool than the "Minsk". The cease-fire, announced two days ago, gives us hope and a chance for the gradual deescalation of the situation in Ukraine. We must remember that the Minsk agreement is, first of all, an agreement of truce, a cease-fire, the withdrawal of heavy military equipment, and other items related to security policy.

Of course, these agreements have been implemented only partially. The Ukrainian side was more responsible in this respect than the separatists. But at the end of the year, when the duration of the Minsk Agreement expires, we are expecting a reflection, we will have to think what to do next?

- And what is the forecast? Will there be a Minsk-3?

- I would not speak about the Minsk-1, Minsk-2 or Minsk-3. In our terminology, this is a Minsk Agreement" The agreements, which were reached this year, are based on what had been achieved before - of course, with additions and corrections.

In fact, there should be one agreement to solve two issues: security and end to the bloodshed, and a political solution for Donbas.

- In an interview with the program Racja Stanu on TVP channel you spoke about the role of Belarus in the peace talks on Ukraine, noting that "the Belarusian authorities are very dependent on Russia economically and politically." Lukashenko's policy in Ukraine was rated by you as "half-hearted, based on the desire to benefit from the war in Ukraine." So why is Europe still dealing with him? How can you count on the actual puppet of Kremlin?

- Diplomacy uses a different language. In addition, I recommend that you watch again my interview in Racja Stanu - I never said that Belarus is trying to get the benefit from the war in Ukraine.

To answer your question - you are well aware that Poland, both in the EU, and the OSCE, has always expressed quite serious remarks about the electoral process and human rights in Belarus.

But we cannot be blind and not see the progress that has occurred - for example, the release of political prisoners.

- The prisoners of conscience, in particular, the former presidential candidate Nikolai Statkevich, said that it happened because in times of crisis Lukashenko needs money. Will the West give money to the dictator?

- Despite the political situation in Belarus, release of political prisoners is a step in the right direction. Although there is no doubt that the human rights situation is far from ideal.

With regard to economic issues, of course, we can see that the Belarusian economy requires additional resources and financial investments. But I would say that, first of all, it requires fundamental reforms. In this area, we offered assistance many years ago.

Without fundamental reform and liberalization of the economy, no money will give real effect. Developed market economies will not invest in Belarus, if there will be carried out no reforms that will ensure the stability of the Belarusian economic system in the long term.

I am referring to the International Monetary Fund and other international institutions. No one will recommend help if Belarus will not hold radical structural reforms and decentralization of the economy. It is also necessary to promote the negotiations on accession to the WTO - not declarative, but real actions.

Of course, we see the economic dependence of Belarus on Russia. Therefore, the main task for those who rules and will rule in Belarus is to conduct economic diversification in all areas: from energy to financial services and construction. Because diversification creates a so-called perfect market in which there is real competition and in which many players are involved, including various foreign investors.

- Does the Polish military realize today the threat coming from the territory of Belarus? From the latest news - Russia announced the deployment of its air base in Baranovichi.

- I suggest we not construct a catastrophic scenario. Naturally, Poland, like any state, is closely watching the situation in the region. This is the subject of our analysis, especially in the framework of NATO.

The Polish government and the new president quite clearly indicate our priorities in the framework of NATO policy. There is a debate about the need to increase the presence of NATO in the region. The next NATO summit, remember, will be held in Warsaw.

- The Eastern Partnership initiative of the EU has shown to be ineffective in dealing with authoritarian states. I have repeatedly stated that Belarus does not fulfill most of the agreements within the framework of the EP. Perhaps it is time to change the approach?

- I totally disagree about it being not effective. The main objective of the Eastern Partnership is the achievement of stability in the region, in countries neighboring to the European Union. We believe that this can be achieved by smoothing the civilizational differences on the basis of shared values and similar standards. So that there would be no big differences between the European Union and our eastern neighbors. It's always been a proposal, not a geopolitical game with someone.

And proof that it was a suggestion, not a requirement, is that the three countries of the Eastern Partnership have been associated, while three others weren't. And two of them are even in another block - the Eurasian Economic Community. And it does not interfere with the further development of the policy of Eastern Partnership.

The summit in Riga quite clearly defined how we are pursuing a policy toward the countries of Eastern Partnership. We consider the EP as one space. Of course, we see a difference in how someone uses our proposals. Perhaps, for some states, we need to develop another proposal that would meet their ambitions, abilities, political and economic context. This is called differentiation of Eastern Partnership, and this is quite clearly confirmed in the final declaration of the summit in Riga.

But the main thing is that the three countries leaders of the EP - Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova - have become closer to the EU. And once again I want to emphasize that this became possible thanks to the high public support for reform and a European course. We saw this in Moldova in 2009, in Ukraine during the first and second Maidan, in Georgia in the early 2000s. Without this popular support, neither association nor fast visa-free regime would have occurred.

- Former Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski urged the EU to "raise the level of dialogue with Belarus." In the past, such "dialogue" already led to actual armed revolution and mass repression. When he was Head of Polish diplomacy in 2011, Sikorski, together with other European ministers, wrote the article "Lukashenko - a loser," noting that he lost the elections in 2010. Why such inconsistent policy towards Belarus?

- I will say this: our response in 2010 was straightforward and no one doubts this. In the last five years we have also been quite principled regarding the release of political prisoners and their rehabilitation.

Of course, we do not hide that fact that we are pleased that finally prisoners of conscience were freed, because it was one of our expectations with respect to Minsk.

But this does not mean that the EU has changed policy with regard to Belarus, but rather means that Belarus has changed its policy towards the EU.

- Opposition leaders today say that the current elections in Belarus can be considered fraudulent. Belarusians are worried that in the context of the war in Ukraine and the EU's readiness "to be friends even with the devil" for the sake of peace, the next elections of Lukashenko may be recognized as legitimate. Are these concerns justified?

- The OSCE Mission from the Warsaw office of the ODIHR is already working in Belarus, we send our observers - long and short term ones. Comprehensive assessment of the entire election (and not only) process, preliminary campaign, the organization of elections will be announced after the elections. Poland will take into account and support all of the recommendations of the OSCE.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation has extensive experience in this area, they have observed many elections in post-Soviet countries, and I am sure, they will be objective.

- Due to inability to work in Belarus, today, several independent Belarusian media outlets, including the website charter97.org, work on the territory of Poland. Why are you helping our media?

- Support for the media is important for us, because we understand how necessary objective information is. And it is our moral duty to help others, because we, the Poles, too, received a lot of help, even before 1989. Everyone should have access to objective information - people should have a choice.

However, I want to note that we do not want the independent media, which we support, to be seen as our tools to change the situation in Belarus, even though they in some way contribute to this process. I as a diplomat stick to the principle of non-intervention in the situation in other countries.

- Poland is the only EU country where the GDP has not decreased for 20 years. What role in this was played by foreign economic activity of the Polish Foreign Ministry?

- In fact, the economic issues are very important to us, including the Foreign Ministry. We have a Department and the Deputy Minister, who oversees these issues, within the framework of working visit of the Minister operate many missions with the participation of Polish business.

As for GDP and all other parameters - it is very interesting. First, for 11 years since the EU accession, our exports and imports grew by 234% and 175%. With regard to the GDP and our comparison with the European indices, Poland's GDP - purchasing power parity - for the first time approached one trillion dollars, which is quite close to the level of the top twenty countries in the world.

In addition, this year the level of GDP per capita will be 17-18 thousand dollars (purchasing power parity). This is about 70% of the EU average. All this shows the enormous progress made over the past 26 years, especially during the years that we have been in the European Union.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs together with the Ministry of Economy contributes to this process. And not just in the EU - in recent years, we have actively entered the East Asian and African markets, such as in the framework of the Go Africa project. The reforms that were carried out during the transitional period, are now yielding tangible results.

- How do you see the role of Poland in the EU and its eastern policy?

- It is no secret that we have always been an active country in the EU's eastern policy. For us it is important to work in a variety of formats: regional, European and non-European. We proceed from the philosophy that together we can do more.

Along with the Visegrad Four, we have developed a package of actions to promote reforms in Ukraine. Under this program, I was chairman of the first round table in Chernigov, where we discussed the issue of decentralization of power. And we see that the Ukrainian parliament has already passed part of the amendments to the Constitution and other legal framework related to this reform.

We also work in other formats. We have sent to Ukraine a few humanitarian convoys, one of them - in cooperations with the Germans. Together with Canadians we have created a program to promote reforms in Ukraine. In the same direction we have been cooperating with the Americans regarding Moldova. Soon starts a separate program with Switzerland aimed at supporting decentralization in Ukraine. We are working closely with Sweden and Denmark over the programs under the Eastern Partnership. A joint project with Japan is possible. Also, my last trip to Israel had to do with potential projects in Eastern Europe.

Write your comment

Follow Charter97.org social media accounts