Search

Begin New Search Topic European Union Political Geography Belarus

11. Belarus: Half a Year of Protests

Author:
Anna Maria Dyner
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Since the rigged presidential elections in August 2020, the public protests against Alexander Lukashenka have continued. The Belarusian authorities have responded with repression, detaining protesters and independent journalists. Despite Lukashenka’s calls to reform the constitution, he also tries to postpone this process. The European Union should increase its support to civil society and keep demanding the Belarusian authorities respect human rights.
Topic:
Civil Society, Human Rights, European Union, and Protests
Political Geography:
Eurasia and Belarus

12. Migration, Borders, and the EU’s Capacity to Act

Author:
Roderick Parkes
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
This in-depth monitoring study assesses the EU’s capacity to handle migration. Why does the European Union respond so badly to migration crises? And why does it repeatedly allow itself to be blackmailed by neighboring states which extract concessions in return for holding back migrants? The ongoing situation at the EU’s border to Belarus is no isolated incident. It reveals vulnerabilities resulting directly from the way the EU regulates its borders and international migration. Over the past decade, a pattern has emerged: the more the EU tries to defend the Schengen Area, its passport-free travel zone, the more vulnerable it makes itself.
Topic:
Migration, European Union, and Borders
Political Geography:
Europe and Belarus

13. To Grow or Not to Grow: Belarus and Lithuania

Author:
Thorvaldur Gylfason and Eduard Hochreiter
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
We compare the economic growth performance of Belarus and Lithuania since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Our interest in this country pair is driven by the two countries´ interwoven histories as well as by the fact that Belarus remains autocratic and strongly tied to Russia, while Lithuania has reinvented itself as a democratic market economy fully integrated into the EU. Our aim is to better understand the extent to which the growth differential between the two countries can be traced to increased efficiency, i.e., total factor productivity, in the use of capital and other resources via, inter alia, better institutions (intensive growth) as opposed to sheer accumulation of capital (extensive growth), the hallmark of Soviet economic growth. To this end, we compare the development of some key determinants of growth in the two countries since the 1990s. A simple growth accounting model suggests that advances in education at all levels, good governance, and institutional reforms have played a more significant role in raising economic output and efficiency in Lithuania than in Belarus, which remains marred by problems related to weak governance as well as autocratic rule. Further, as in Estonia and Latvia, the EU perspective has made a significant contribution to growth in Lithuania. The Russian connection has done less for Belarus. Finally, we touch upon the impact of the corona virus on the economies of the two countries.
Topic:
European Union, Economy, Economic Growth, Post-Soviet Space, and Autocracy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Lithuania, and Belarus

14. Lessons from Belarus: How the EU can support clean elections in Moldova and Georgia

Author:
Andrew Wilson
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The European Union was largely on the sidelines when the Belarusian regime rigged the 2020 presidential election, but upcoming votes in Georgia and Moldova pose a different challenge. The EU should make use of its significant leverage in Georgia and Moldova to counter their ruling parties’ extensive repertoire of electoral dirty tricks. The bloc will need to account for the obstacles created by the coronavirus crisis, not least the difficulty of conducting large-scale monitoring missions. The EU will also need to adjust to the ruling parties’ use of pandemic assistance for political gain, and their efforts to prevent citizens abroad from voting.
Topic:
International Relations, Corruption, Elections, European Union, and Coronavirus
Political Geography:
Europe, Moldova, Georgia, and Belarus

15. Four Scenarios for the Crisis in Belarus

Author:
András Rácz, Cristina Gherasimov, and Milan Nič
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
As protests continue to galvanize Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko is consolidating his grip on power. Volatile domestic dynamics – and Russia’s reactions to them – will shape the discredited regime’s future. This paper outlines four possible scenarios for Belarus up to one year from now. They include options for Russia and the EU, whose strategic objectives differ, but whose short-term interests align: preventing bloodshed, avoiding open geopolitical conflict, and preparing for a post-Lukashenko transition.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, European Union, Geopolitics, Protests, and Transition
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Eastern Europe, and Belarus

16. Under Pressure: Can Belarus resist Russian coercion?

Author:
Anaïs Marin
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
Belarus is traditionally considered to be Russia’s closest ally, and their alliance is a cornerstone of post-Soviet integration projects, both military (the Collective Security Treaty Organisation - CSTO) and economic (the Eurasian Economic Union - EAEU). But bilateral relations have entered a different and more conflictual phase. The paradigm shift started in 2014, when Belarus invoked its constitutional neutrality pledge to refuse to side with Russia in its ongoing conflict with Ukraine and the West. Playing this card allowed President Lukashenka to appear as a security guarantor both in the eyes of Belarusians and the West. Irritated by such autonomy, Moscow indicated that it now wants more for its money. Russia is no longer ready to subsidise the Belarusian economy in exchange for its neighbour’s fleeting geopolitical loyalty. In linking, in 2018, the resumption of economic privileges to ‘deeper’ political integration within the Union State that the two countries nominally established 20 years ago, Russia stepped up the pressure. Yet Vladimir Putin made Belarus an offer he knew Aliaksandr Lukashenka would refuse: the Belarusian president had repeatedly stated that Belarus’s sovereignty was ‘not for sale’. Given its dependence on Russia and current economic hardships, Belarus might not be able to resist Moscow’s ‘coercion to integrate’, however. Its capacity to uphold its sovereignty is being challenged from outside, while Lukashenka’s regime survival is under stress from within: in the wake of the 9 August presidential election, unprecedented opposition forces emerged which the Belarusian regime started cracking down on.1 Should repression intensify, leading the West to reintroduce sanctions, Minsk’s efforts of the past years towards normalising relations with Brussels and Washington would come to nothing. Yet renewed (self-)isolation of Belarus is exactly what Russia needs to reach its strategic goal of keeping Belarus in its orbit, and extract more concessions from its fragile leadership. This presents the EU with a dilemma it knows all too well: how can it support Belarus’s efforts to preserve its independence, without increasing the resilience of Lukashenka’s authoritarian regime or making Russia more assertive?
Topic:
European Union, Partnerships, Geopolitics, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Eurasia, and Belarus

17. City Diplomacy: The EU’s Hidden Capacity to Act

Author:
Roderick Parkes
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Under the auspices of the EU, mayors are beginning to act like diplomats, brokering deals and defusing geopolitical disputes. On the one hand, such “city diplomacy” offers benefits: cities are reaching spots that the EU ordinarily cannot, flipping conventional hierarchies and making big issues seem small. On the other, it is potentially destabilizing in an era in which the exercise of power can have far-reaching consequences. Harnessing the activism of cities will be difficult, but not impossible.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Political Activism, European Union, and Cities
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, Lebanon, and Belarus

18. Presidential Election in Belarus Tensions Are Likely to Prevail

Author:
András Rácz
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
The impending presidential election in Belarus on August 9, 2020, is highly likely to result in the smooth victory of incumbent Alexandr Lukashenko. Despite this fact, the unprecedented – and still growing – politicization of Belarusian society constitutes a challenge to the regime that will not fade even after a clear-cut election. The resulting tensions will require more diplomatic attention from Germany and the European Union.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Politics, European Union, Society, and Presidential Elections
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, Germany, and Belarus

19. Civil Society Voices: How the EU Should Engage Its Eastern Neighbours

Author:
Iskra Kirova and Sabine Freizer
Publication Date:
05-2015
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Open Society Foundations
Abstract:
The EU’s “eastern neighbourhood” is an increasingly complicated and contested space. The challenge of Russia’s resurgence and regional elites’ resistance to reform are forcing the EU to reevaluate its policies. With the launch of its Eastern Partnership six years ago, the EU was ready to offer its neighbors to the east—Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine—integration into the EU market, mobility of people, and close political ties in exchange for rule of law and democratic and economic reforms. Today, it questions whether this policy has secured its strategic interests and political influence. The Eastern Partnership reinforced domestic constituencies for change in at least three partners—Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine—that in 2014 signed association agreements. It has not lost the potential to contribute to democratic processes and support reformers in the other three: Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Belarus. The Eastern Partnership remains the EU’s most effective foreign policy instrument to build accountable and stable institutions and states, and uphold the EU’s commitment to its neighbors’ sovereignty and right to make independent foreign policy choices. This policy paper—the result of extensive discussions with experts and civil society leaders—highlights local concerns and expectations about the EU’s role in the region and its support for stability and democracy. As the EU rethinks its policies in the area, this paper offers recommendations on how to make the Eastern Partnership more effective and relevant to people, societies, and government, and to secure the EU’s interests in an increasingly polarized and unstable region.
Topic:
Civil Society, Nationalism, Regional Cooperation, European Union, Democracy, Economic Policy, Elites, and Economic Integration
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Belarus

20. Narrow Focus, Broad Vision: A Strategic View of the Eastern Partnership

Author:
Emmet Tuohy and Anna Bulakh
Publication Date:
10-2013
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
In 2009, the EU’s Eastern Partnership (EP) initiative was launched with high hopes of spreading some of the fruits of the 2004 and 2007 enlargements to the countries on Europe’s eastern periphery. The main objectives of the program—targeted at six states, three in Eastern Europe (Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine) and three in the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia)—have been to support these countries in terms of economic and political reform, socio-economic development, and other fields, with the long-term objective of promoting deeper cooperation with the EU. In 2009, the EU’s Eastern Partnership (EP) initiative was launched with high hopes of spreading some of the fruits of the 2004 and 2007 enlargements to the countries on Europe’s eastern periphery. The main objectives of the program—targeted at six states, three in Eastern Europe (Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine) and three in the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia)—have been to support these countries in terms of economic and political reform, socio-economic development, and other fields, with the long-term objective of promoting deeper cooperation with the EU. Unfortunately, in the last four years these high expectations have simply not been met. While there have been elements of success, the record of the EP has also demonstrated the limits of the EU’s foreign policy influence […] Accordingly, the upcoming Vilnius summit—marking the fourth anniversary of the establishment of the EP—will be an opportunity for the EU to take stock and reevaluate not only its perception of the partnership states, but also its broader foreign policy objectives and the instruments through which it seeks to accomplish them. It has been argued that the key reason for supporting the Eastern Partnership is because it enables the EU to spread its values. Yet, this is precisely the thing that the European Union cannot (and should not) be doing at this point in time. […] Yet, even while the EU may not have the capacity to create a wide space for the European values of consensus and liberal democracy stretching across the Eurasian landmass from Portugal to the Pacific, it can and does have the ability to deepen cooperation with its Eastern partners on areas that support its interest. In this paper, we concentrate on the most important such dimension: energy security.
Topic:
Security, Development, Economics, Energy Policy, Politics, European Union, and Partnerships
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Belarus