Connect with us

Belarus

Lithuania is seriously concerned about the nuclear power plant in Belarus

SHARE:

Published

on

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you've consented to and to improve our understanding of you. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Vilnius and Minsk have been in conflict for a long time over the launch of a new nuclear power plant in Belarus in Ostrovets. According to Lithuania: "The Belarusian nuclear power plant poses a threat to EU citizens. Therefore, it is necessary to stop such an irresponsible launch. In addition, the EU should not allow third-country producers who do not comply with the highest standards of nuclear safety and environmental protection to enter the electricity market," writes Alexi Ivanov, Moscow correspondent.

Since the time of the Soviet Union, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Russia and Belarus have been linked in a single energy space and so far this remains a reality. The Baltic States still buy electricity from Russia. Lithuania is confident that Belarus has a share in the supply of Russian electricity, which produces it at the new nuclear power plant.

The news that the Belarusian nuclear power plant started operating in a test mode caused a state-organized panic in Lithuania. The authorities authorized sending SMS messages to the population and messages on social networks about the potential radiation hazard. Recently for preventive purposes they began to distribute free potassium iodide tablets. In total, the Ministry of health of Lithuania purchased and transferred four million pills to sixteen municipalities of the Republic located at a distance of up to 100 kilometres from Ostrovets. The medicine can be obtained at the pharmacy with an identity card.

Advertisement

Currently, Lithuania has agreed with Latvia and Estonia to boycott the Belarusian nuclear power plant. Moreover, Vilnius has launched a high-profile campaign regarding the threat of a power plant for the entire EU.

The three Baltic States are trying to establish a connection with the energy systems of the Nordic countries, primarily Finland. However, this connection is not working properly yet.

Energy operators in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and Poland have signed an agreement with the European Commission's Executive Agency for innovation and networks to finance the second phase of the exit from the Russian-Belarusian energy supply system. €720 million was allocated for this.

Advertisement

A few months ago Latvia and Estonia said they were ready to support Lithuania and refuse to purchase electricity from the"unsafe" Belarusian nuclear power plant. But how to implement this in practice is unclear.

After all, since the Soviet times, the power lines of the five countries have been United in a single energy ring Belarus-Russia-Estonia-Lithuania-Latvia. In 2018, the Baltic States announced their intention to withdraw from this system and synchronize the electricity grid with the EU countries. However, this is only possible by 2025.

So far, the Baltic States continue to buy Russian and Belarusian electricity.

 

Belarus

International sanctions: Easy to misapply and hard to reverse

Published

on

In June of this year, after the Lukashenko government’s forced grounding of a Ryanair flight in Minsk, the EU announced that 78 persons and seven entities would be added to their sanctions against Belarus. Following suit this Monday (13 September), the UK government imposed a raft of trade, financial, and aviation restrictions in response to the abuses of the Lukashenko regime. One controversial inclusion in both rounds of sanctions was Mikhail Gutseriev, the Russian entrepreneur and philanthropist, who has business interests in the Belarusian energy and hospitality sectors. Many have been puzzled as to why Gutseriev, as a businessman with investments all over the world, has been targeted in connection to his relatively limited involvement in Belarus. His case has also raised broader questions and initiated a debate about the efficacy of sanctions which confer guilt by association, rather than punish known lawbreakers, writes Colin Stevens.

The EU’s ‘restrictive measures’

Starting with the EU’s approach, the block has a well-established process for executing ‘restrictive measures’, the primary tool of its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). European sanctions have four key objectives: safeguarding the EU’s interests and security, preserving the peace, supporting democracy and human rights, and strengthening international security. If sanctions are imposed, they can fall on governments, companies, groups or organisations, and individuals. In terms of ratification, the EU’s Foreign Affairs and Security representative, and the European Commission, make a joint sanction proposal, which is then voted on by the European Council. If the vote is passed, the EU’s court will then decide if the measure protects ‘human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular due process and the right to an effective remedy’. Note that the European Parliament, the EU’s democratically elected chamber, is kept informed of the proceedings but can neither reject nor ratify the sanctions.

Advertisement

The difficulty of application

When adding an individual or entity to their sanctions list, the EU sets out why they deem the measure to be appropriate. Returning to the controversial case of Mikhail Gutseriev, the block has accused Gutseriev of ‘benefitting from and supporting the Lukashenko regime’. They describe him as a ‘long-time friend’ of the President, the supposed smoking gun being two times when both men were confirmed to be in the same vicinity. The first was at the opening of a new Orthodox church, which Gutseriev had sponsored, and the second was at Lukashenko’s swearing-in as President, what the EU describes as a ‘secret’ event, despite it being broadcast on TV and being open to the public. The EU also reports that Lukashenko once thanked Gutseriev for the money he had given to Belarusian charities and the billions of dollars he had invested in the country.

Taking a step back, it’s clear that the EU is working on the basis of guilt by association – Gutseriev has been in Lukashenko’s orbit, ergo he is a supporter of his regime. However, the problem with the EU’s approach is that there is little hard evidence of a genuine closeness between the two men. What is there to say that Gutseriev did not simply maintain a working relationship with the President so that he could continue to invest and run his businesses in Belarus? In a communication explaining its internal process, the European Commission states that restrictive measures are imposed ‘to bring about a change in policy activity…by entities or individuals’. To change a harmful policy is of course desirable, but the EU must be careful not to disincentivise the small group of investors who take the risk of operating in, and making charitable donations to, low-income countries with unstable leaderships.

Advertisement

The UK’s position

Considering this potential drawback in their approach, the EU will undoubtedly have been pleased that the British government has likewise targeted Lukashenko and those deemed to be close to him. Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, accused the Belarusian President of crushing democracy and outlined that action would be taken against the country’s state-owned industries and aerospace companies. In general, the UK’s sanctioning process has similar objectives to the EU’s, and both favour trade and financial measures, such as arms embargoes and asset freezes. Like their partners in Europe, the British government will be hoping that they can change Lukashenko’s policies and approach, without inflicting unnecessary economic harm on ordinary Belarussians. Yet history shows that finding this balance is far from easy. Going back to the early 2000s, the British government and the EU imposed sanctions on Belarus and Zimbabwe, and on their wealthy elites. Judging by the positions of both countries now, with Belarus under Lukashenko, and Zimbabwe still beset by economic woes and internal conflict, one would be hard pressed to say that such an approach had been a success.

Getting things right

In fairness to the EU and the UK, they have clarified that they want to avoid adverse consequences for those not responsible for the policies and actions in question. However, by ascribing sanctions on the basis of guilt by association, both parties run the risk of doing exactly that. Hassan Blasim, the celebrated Kurdish film director who fled Saddam Hussein’s regime, said that the West’s economic sanctions meant that ‘life was almost dead’ in Iraq in the 1990s. What’s more, it was a hugely controversial invasion, not the regime of sanctions, which eventually led to Hussein’s downfall. Western diplomats may be trying their best to avoid doing similar damage today, but they should be careful not to undermine the investment and enterprise, the lifeblood of any economy, that Belarus will need to rebuild in the future.

Continue Reading

Belarus

Belarus: Sentencing of Marya Kaliesnikava and Maksim Znak

Published

on

Today (6 September) in Minsk political prisoners Marya Kaliesnikava and Maksim Znak were sentenced to 11 and 10 years in prison respectively. In August 2020, Marya Kaliesnikava, together with Ms Tsikhanouskaya and Ms Tsepkalo, became a symbol of the movement for democratic Belarus. In a trial behind closed doors, together with a prominent lawyer, Mr Znak, she was tried on unfounded charges of “conspiring to seize state power in an unconstitutional way”, “calling for actions aimed at damaging the national security of Belarus through the use of media and the internet” and “establishing and leading and an extremist group”.

In a statement the EU's External Action Service said: "The EU deplores the continuous blatant disrespect by the Minsk regime of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people of Belarus. The EU also reiterates its demands for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners in Belarus (now numbering more than 650), including Ms Kaliesnikava and Mr Znak, journalists and all people who are behind bars for exercising their rights. Belarus must adhere to its international commitments and obligations within the UN and OSCE. The EU will continue its efforts to promote accountability for the brutal repression by the Belarusian authorities."

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Belarus

Poland declares state of emergency on Belarus border amid migrant surge

Published

on

By

Polish border guard officers stand guard next to a group of migrants stranded on the border between Belarus and Poland near the village of Usnarz Gorny, Poland September 1, 2021. REUTERS/Kacper Pempel

Poland declared a state of emergency in two regions bordering Belarus last week following a surge of illegal migration that Warsaw has blamed on its neighbour, write Alan Charlish, Pawel Florkiewicz, Joanna Plucinska, Alicja Ptak, Anna Koper and Matthias Williams, Reuters.

Poland and the European Union have accused Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko of encouraging hundreds of migrants to cross into Polish territory to put pressure on the bloc over sanctions it has imposed on Minsk.

Advertisement

The emergency order - the first of its kind in Poland since communist times - banned mass gatherings and limited people's movements in a 3-km (2-mile) deep strip of land along the frontier for 30 days, the government said.

Aid groups working with migrants said there had already been an increase in Polish police and armoured vehicles in the area in recent days, and that they were worried the order would limit their work and leave refugees stranded.

"The atmosphere is generally violent, there are uniformed, armed servicemen everywhere...it reminds me of war," Marta Anna Kurzyniec, a resident of the Polish border town of Krynki, told Reuters

Advertisement

Poland began building a barbed wire fence last week to curb the flow of migrants from countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

The EU imposed economic sanctions on Belarus following a disputed election in August 2020 and a crackdown on the opposition, and says Lukashenko has deliberately encouraged migrants to cross into Poland, Latvia and Lithuania in retaliation.

Belarus' Foreign Minister Vladimir Makei on Thursday blamed "Western politicians" for the situation on the borders, Belarusian state news agency Belta reported.

"Belarus has always honored all the provisions of our agreements to the letter," Makei told a news conference.

Polish presidential spokesman Blazej Spychalski said the situation on the border was "difficult and dangerous".

"Today, we as Poland, being responsible for our own borders, but also for the borders of the European Union, must take measures to ensure the security of Poland and the (EU)," he said.

Rights activists have accused Polish authorities of denying adequate medical care to stranded migrants. Warsaw says they are the responsibility of Belarus.

Marysia Zlonkiewicz from the aid group Chlebem i Solą (With Bread and Salt) said police had asked them to stop their activity along the border before the state of emergency was announced.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending