- Home
- About
-
Staff
- Commentaries by FPS Staff
- Rusakovich Andrei Vladimirovich
- Rozanov Anatoliy Arkadievich
- Research Briefs
- Tihomirov Alexander Valentinovich
- Shadurski Victor Gennadievich
- Sidorchuk Valery Kirillovich
- Brovka Gennady Mikhailovich
- Gancherenok Igor Ivanovich
- Malevich Ulianna Igorevna
- Prannik Tatiana Alexandrovna
- Selivanov Andrey Vladimirovich
- Sharapo Alexander Victorovich
- Testimonials
-
Conference Proceedings
- Amber Coast Transport Initiative Project Concept
- Nato and Belarus - partnership, past tensions and future possibilities
- OSCE High-Level Seminar on Military Doctrine
- Poland-Belarus: perspectives of cross-border cooperation
- Polish-Belarussian Transborder Customs Cooperation: сurrent Problems and Challenges
-
Reports
- We see the significant reduction of the U.S. Army in Europe
- NATO's International Security Role
- International seminar on issues in the Collective Security Treaty Organization
- Belarus-Turkey: The ways of cooperation - 2011
- Belarus - Poland: two decades of international relations
- Belarus-Turkey: The ways of cooperation - 2009
- International seminar Belarusian Diaspora: Past and Present
- The first Round Table
-
News Releases
- The conference on Overcoming the financial crisis
- Round Table on history and future of Belarus-Poland cooperation
- Seminar on Belarusian diaspora: past and present
- The conference on Belarus in the Modern World
- The conference on Economic, legal and informational aspects of cooperation in customs sphere
- Comments
- Contact
Written by Yauheni Preiherman
25.07.2011
While the ENP reform is very important for the EU’s foreign policy, it does not introduce any significant innovations into the framework of relations between Belarus and the EU. This is a direct result of the “frozen” state of relations, when cooperation between official Minsk and Brussels is kept at the minimum possible level.
In pursuant to the policy of the overhauled ENP towards a phase-down of the intergovernmental component in the EU relations with the neighbors accompanied by an adequate strengthening of engagement with civil societies, the Belarusian non-governmental sector will likely see an increase in the volume of support.
The support will be provided via both the European Commission and the European External Action Service, and international financial institutions associated with the EU. At the same time, it is worthy of note that one should not expect a revolutionary growth in volumes of support, because the resources meant for Belarus for the period 2011-2013 were almost quadrupled by the European Commission in February 2011.
Because the EU has no explicit and consistent strategy on Belarus, the government-civil society correlation in playing the role of the basic partner of united Europe will remain volatile and unsteady. The infeasibility of a single position on Belarus of all EU member-states stands behind the rather low level of conditionality that the Belarusian regime has to meet to get back to the public negotiation process with the European Union. In Belarus’ reality, it means that the illegitimacy of A. Lukashenka as the president ends as soon as he claims ready to make minimum concessions, rather than as a result of a free and fair election.
The launch of negotiations between the EU and Belarus on visa facilitation and readmission may become a positive example of the practical implementation of values of the refurbished ENP, although the talks are not a direct consequence of the ENP reform. Visa facilitation and readmission treaties are first steps towards visa liberalization, and, in the long view, a complete removal of visa barriers for citizens on both sides of the Schengen border.
Read the full text of the blitz in pdf
