Natalia Radzina: It is immoral to put economic interests before people’s lives

• 27.05.2013, 13:20

The EU’s conversation with Minsk must be based on principled positions and tough conditions.

The editor-in-chief of a Belarusian web-site charter97.org Natalia Radzina states in an interview to ru.Delfi.lt that one cannot speak of any slackening of repressions in Belarus. The history shows that “the more unprincipled the West is to Lukashenka, the harder it is for political prisoners”, the journalist reminds.

“They were released out of prisons exactly when the West had a tough attitude, economic sanctions were introduced”, - Natalia Radzina emphasizes.

According to her, the current talks over the renewal of a dialogue with Minsk show that the West still has no strategy towards Belarus. Moreover, she noted that as soon as the regime’s isolation gets frozen, this leads to the results that the world witnessed on 19 December 2010.

- Recently MEP Justas Paletskis’ report on the situation in Belarus was issued. It states that there has been a discernible improvement of the situation in Belarus while international human rights organizations, Belarusian oppositional politicians as well as many European politicians say that nothing has changed in the country. How would you explain the emergence of such a report?

- I immediately paid attention that the report had been prepared by a MEP for a country, the export of solvents (oil products disguised as solvents) to which had increased in the previous year by 15 times. It seemed to me that there was a certain connection. Apart from that I remembered that Justas Paletskis was mentioned in lord Timothy Bell’s report as a politician with whom it was recommended to communicate to influence Belarusian authorities. Mr Bell once worked on improving the image of the Belarusian ruler.

- Justas Paletskis denied with acquaintance with him in an interview to Radio Svaboda…

- Then how could he had been mentioned in these documents? If we speak of the report itself, then it caused indignation even of the people, to conversations with whom he refers. In particular, a human rights center Viasna. So one cannot speak of any slackening of repressions in Belarus, the situation has cardinally deteriorated. One may speak of the decrease of political activity, but not of the slackening of repressions. In this regards, a feeling arises that Justas Paletskis’ report serves the interests of some European Politicians, who speak in favor of a new dialogue with Lukashenka.

- It would seem that Europeans could have learnt from the events of 19 December 2010. We know that they were then shocked by what had happened, but now the issue of renewing the dialogue is on the table again. What do you think of that?

- It is sad and, unfortunately, it once again proves that the West has no strategy towards Belarus, but has a high trade turnout instead. It is clear that such countries as Lithuania and Latvia experience economic blackmail on the part of the regime. But one must understand that it is immoral to put economic interests before human rights, the lives of political prisoners and the lives of the Belarusians, who massively undergo repressions.

- Is it possible to speak of any progress on the cases of the political prisoners, that Belarusian authorities react in any way to the demands of the West, which keeps constantly restating the necessity of their release and full exoneration?

- As the history shows, the more unprincipled the West is to Lukashenka, the harder it is for political prisoners in custody. They were released out of prisons exactly when the West had a tough attitude, when economic sanctions were introduced. Recollect the year 2008, when the US introduced sanctions against Belarusian enterprises. After this all the political prisoners were released. There are sanctions against Lukashenka’s regime on the part of the EU, there are visa restrictions and sanctions against three oligarchs from Lukashenka’s ‘family’. It is absolutely not enough. But note that as soon as sanctions were introduced against these oligarchs, Andrej Sannikau and Dzmitry Bandarenka were released. This proves the efficiency of sanctions, but since they have been later suspended, and the EU started talking of the possibility of normalizing the relations with the dictatorship, the situation with the political prisoners has only deteriorated. People are in terrible conditions today.

- How do you assess the current position of Lithuania on Belarus?

- Unfortunately, Lithuania, which borders Belarus, takes a rather passive position on this issue. The EU’s leader in terms of interest in Belarusian issues is Poland today. It sticks to a principled position, which can be seen from the statement by Radoslaw Sikorski. It supports independent media in Belarus, but Poland alone is unable to solve the Belarusian issue, that is why it needs Lithuania’s support.

I understand the head of Lithuania’s MFA Linas Linkiavichus and his words that Belarus must remain in Europe, and the dialogue must keep going. But it all depends on what kind of a dialogue that is. If it is based on principled positions and tough conditions are put forward for the regime to meet, then the result is possible. If the EU makes concession and Lukashenka tortures political prisoners at the same time, then it is not a dialogue.

- Once, after the December of 2010, even Russia reproached Belarus with human rights violations. What is the role of Russia in Belarus today?

- We can observe dangerous tendencies n Russia today. It is an authoritarian country, in which there are political prisoners too. After 2010 it actually did take a principled position. If you remember, Russia did not congratulate Lukashenka on the ‘victory’ for a month. There was a feeling that it waited and wanted to see the West’s reaction. The West’s position was tough for long time, but on 30 January 2011 the EU postponed the introduction of economic sanctions.

I was released two days before the consideration of this issue, and it was done for the EU not to introduce these sanctions, although I was not freed. In fact put under house arrest, and a journalist Iryna Khalip and a former presidential candidate Uladzimir Niaklaeu were put under actual home arrest. It was not freedom, we were to face the trial. I had to escape the country, and others were sentenced to the limitation of freedom and are also political prisoner today. But the EU then postponed the consideration of the issue on sanctions and made concessions, whereas it should have demanded the release and exoneration of all the political prisoners. As the result we have what we have: having seen such an unprincipled position of the West Russia congratulated Lukashenka and continued with its game, since it is natural that it has its own interests.

What is the most important is that one should not let themselves be led by those Belarusian and European politicians, who say that the regime will go to Russia, if a tough position is maintained. Is has already gone there. The threat to the independence of Belarus has been there for the whole time of Lukashenka’s rule. For him Russian has always been the only ally, which also has human rights problems, and with which there have always been connections of corruption nature.

- You travel a lot and communicate with European politicians, the representatives of international organizations. Should we expect to see Lukashenka in Vilnius, which is what political scientists are now discussing?

- When you saw Lukashenka here in 2009, when the president of Lithuania met him, this all led to the events of 2010, this led to Lithuanian law enforcement agencies’ giving away the banking accounts of a human rights activist Ales Bialatski. That is why the isolation of the dictator must under no circumstances be unfrozen. As soon as it happens, we immediately see to what results it leads.