Moscow turns to Belarus

(Flags of Belarus and Russia.)

          In her column in The Washington Post on January 4th, Anne Applebaum tries to draw attention to recent moves that Russia has made vis-à-vis its neighbor to the west, Belarus. According to the US journalist and historian, Moscow´s imperial ambition has turned to Minsk, and some of this signals would be the possibility of the Russians take over some services of the Belarussian government as customs, visa, and monetary and tax policies. Such measures would be part of a greater project of integration of the two countries´ economy. 

          The country´s president, Alexander Lukashenka, met Putin on 6 and 25 December and, in a sign of political rapprochement, exchanged public New Year´s congratulation with his colleague. In his message, Putin said that the union between the two countries created by the treaty which established the Union State of Russia and Belarus in 1999 has been a success. Since the crisis in Ukraine in 2014, Lukashenka has distanced himself from Moscow and has tried to design a more independent foreign policy approaching to Europe. Russia, for its part, has sought to avoid distancing of Belarus and consolidate its influence in the surrounding countries. 

          On December 28th, Russian Prime Minister, Dmitri Medvedev, signed a decree that created a committee to work on integration between the two countries. The committee will be chaired by the Russian Economic Development Minister, Maxim Oreshkin. This signs a deepening of the relationship and, consequently, a greater linkage of Belarus to its most powerful neighbor.

   

          As I commented in the end of December, Belarus has given recent signals of detachment from Russia, such as Lukashenka´s statement that he will refer to the neighbour country not as a "fraternal state", but as a "partner", and the statement that no foreign military bases are needed in his country, including Russian ones. He also said that Belarus will never be part of Russia. Moscow´s reaction, therefore, isn´t surprising. As Applebaum recalls, Putin´s popularity is falling, and force demonstrations abroad, such as the wars in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria, renew the Kremlin´s political capital, and reaffirm Russian power to the world.

          Finally, Applebaum recalls that the West has given less and less relevance to Minsk, and this lack of interest could encourage Moscow´s actions in a movement to absorb the neighbouring country. Its not appropriate here to analyze this possibility which has been suggested for some Western experts, but given the Putin government´s history this possibility isn´t null. I refer to the Russian politics reorganization since 2000 with a increasingly centralizing power, the aggressive actions abroad since the Russian president has resumed the post in 2012, and the strong influence of the Eurasian Movement in the military and political elite of Russia which wishes the creation of an imperial power. 

          The country´s current crisis and public discontent with the government´s plan of reforming social security announced, not by chance, during the World Cup are additional factors that could stimulate Kremlin´s actions abroad. Even if Luklashenka says to guarantee otherwise, the lack of strength and economic and energetic dependence on the Russians give him limited room of maneuver.

          Since assuming the presidency on the last day of 1999, Putin has tried to rebuild the Russian power and reestablish its Empire. This indicates the need of gaining not only power, but also terrain. Literally.