Paul Goble
Staunton,
July 9 – Minsk has both delimited and demarcated its borders with Latvia,
Lithuania and Ukraine, albeit after many delays and long talks; but it has not
done so with Russia up to now, largely because as the two are members of a
union state, neither Minsk nor Moscow felt any immediate need to do so. (The
Belarus-Polish border was demarcated in Soviet times.)
But now, in the wake of events in Ukraine, Ilya
Zakharkin says, Belarus is more interested in doing so; and Moscow has agreed
to begin the task first of drawing a precise line on maps (delimitation) and
then putting up signs to indicate where it is (demarcation) by 2026 (ritmeurasia.org/news--2018-07-09--belorusskaja-granica-bez-demarkacii-ne-obojtis-37405).
“At first glance,” the Belarusian
analyst says, “the demarcation of the border between our two countries which
are part of a Union state isn’t necessary since it is only a formal sign designating
the territorial limits of the states.” But in fact, there are many symbolic and
practical reasons for doing so.
In May 1995, Alyaksandr Lukashenka
and Russia’s prime minister at the time, Viktor Chernomyrdin, put up a symbolic
border post, but the border services of the two countries did not move up to
that border but rather remained where they had been, in Pskov and Smolensk for
Russia and Brest for Belarus.
According to official information,
the analyst continues, “the Belarusian border guards from that time forward never
carried out any defense of the segment of the state border between our two
countries.” Instead, they shared it with Russia which assumed responsibility
for Belarus at Russia’s external border and vice versa.
Up to 2014, the Russian-Belarusian
border was relatively stable, although there were occasional bureaucratic
problems. Tariff barriers were formally annulled in 2011. But from the time of the Maidan in Ukrane,
the situation changed in a radical way. Border fences went up, the Northern
Fleet expanded patrols, and free passage across the border effectively ended.
In February 2017, Moscow announced
that it was establishing a border zone along the Belarusian border, and fights
from Minsk to Russian destinations were shifted from domestic to international
terminals with their passengers required to go through customs (news.tut.by/society/529900.html).
These Russian actions came in response to Minsk’s
decision to allow citizens from 80 countries to visit Belarus for up to five
days without a visa, Zakharkin says. Russia tightened up passport control in
other ways as well. Minsk was upset, viewing the Russian actions as a violation
of earlier agreements; and Lukashenka insisted that “there was no need for any
additional controls between the two states.”
But
three other problems, including the illegal flow of goods, contraband and migrants,
meant that both countries began to recognize that they needed a real border,
with real controls to prevent one country from dumping its problems onto the
other, something Minsk feared Russia would do, especially with illegal immigrants.
But
despite these concerns, the Belarusian side did not consider it necessary to
revise the existing status of the border until the beginning of this year. In February, Lukashenka declared that he “did
not think that Russia wants to restore a full-blown border with Belarus” because
if it did, that could lead to “a serious conflict.”
The
events of the last several months, however, “have demonstrated that the situation
is ever more getting out of Belarusian control: in Moscow ever more often officials
began to speak about the need of introducing border controls” to limit the influx
of goods banned by Moscow’s counter-sanctions regime.
In
June, Lukashenka was forced to declare that “the Russians ‘themselves do not understand
what they want and what they are doing at the Belarusian-Russian border.’” They
need to make up their minds; that is not Minsk’s task, he insisted. But Belarus
is prepared to respond to whatever the Russians do.
The
problem is that establishing a real border will not be inexpensive. Estimates
are that Minsk would have to come up with “more than 20 million US dollars” for
fixed costs and pay “no fewer than 5,000 border guards,” as well as additional
soldiers for the military. Thus, forming a real border for Minsk will be “an
extremely complex and costly task.”
The
situation at present is this, Zakharkin says. “Minsk has made clear to its
partners that control of the border is a prerogative of the Belarusian
authorities and that no one will be allowed to interfere in this, including its
closest ally, Russia. The leadership of the republic view this as one of the last
real signs of its independence.” And it won’t yield on this point.
“However,”
the analyst continues, “in a situation in which Belarus has frequently talked about
its desire to build a Union state, the republic must approach this issue more carefully.
Yes, from the Russian side our peoples have the right to expect greater
tolerance in the search for a consensus” especially given NATO’s new activities
in Poland and the instability in Ukraine.
No comments:
Post a Comment