Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-10-27-Speech-3-110"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041027.8.3-110"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, the political situation in Belarus is going from bad to worse. During the parliamentary elections of 17 October 2004, very few opposition candidates were allowed to run and none of them were elected to parliament. The referendum to allow a third presidential term is said to have been won by a large majority of votes. The way is now open for President Lukashenko to put up his candidature for the presidential elections in 2006 and be elected for a third time, if not become president for life. If these presidential elections are conducted the same way as the elections and referendum of 17 October, there is no doubt that he will succeed in this.
Assistance to civil society is already a long-standing policy of the EU. But to bring about this support within the borders of Belarus is getting more and more difficult in practice. The regime is doing everything to prevent western support to non-governmental organisations. An alternative is to develop more activities for Belarus civil society outside Belarus.
The invitation of a number of opposition and civil society leaders to visit to Brussels in May is one example of this new policy. But more can be done, in the form of participation of Belarussians in seminars, courses and studies abroad. In the years ahead we should invest more in the Belarussian people in this way.
I am also very happy about the establishment of a separate delegation for Belarus in the European Parliament. This will give you as parliamentarians a chance to focus more on this neighbouring country and to establish your own contacts. I think that this step also proves to the Belarussians that the EU takes the situation in their country very seriously.
Secondly, what negative measures can the EU take? Relations are already on a very low level. We have had sanctions in the form of a visa ban against the Belarus leaders in the past. Recently, we extended it to cover other high-level people. The only area that is still left aside is the economy and trade. Such a policy would clearly also hit the population as such, and will further isolate Belarus. President Lukashenko would argue that the population is worse off as a result of the EU’s action, not his own policy. Furthermore, the ordinary citizen will be worst hit. So it is I am afraid a double-edged sword. We have to be very careful when considering such steps.
The political developments in Belarus are of great concern not only to the EU, but also to others such as the OSCE and the US. If we give the signals together, our voice will be better heard. But we will also have to work together with Russia, which seems to be the only country to have some influence over Belarus. We therefore also raised the situation in Belarus at the ministerial troika with Minister Lavrov last week. Whilst the Russian government shares our concern about the situation, unfortunately we disagree about the way forward. The Russians do not want to maintain the strict policy that the EU is implementing. And that I deeply regret.
As I explained, the instruments available to the EU to influence developments are limited. But we will continue, as the EU, as individual Member States and through the OSCE, to try to influence the situation with these instruments and bring about a real improvement of the lives of the Belarus people.
In our declaration of 20 October 2004 we clearly condemned the voting process. We noted with great concern that the elections and referendum failed to meet the international standards for democratic elections. The OSCE/ODIHR preliminary findings are clear about what went wrong. The European Union is deeply disappointed that both during the election campaign and on election day there were concrete signs of the Belarussian authorities’ disregard for democratic rules. The extent and character of the irregularities observed by the OSCE International Election Observation Mission raise serious doubts whether the results reflect the will of the Belarussian electorate at all. Exit polls, which we consider to be more credible, suggest that this is not the case.
You probably all saw the subsequent pictures on television last week, of peaceful demonstrators and opposition leaders in Belarus being beaten up by police. We are very concerned about these violent attacks. These attacks, especially the attack on the life and health of opposition leader Lebedko, seem to have been well targeted and prepared. We call upon the Belarussian authorities to release immediately all those who were arrested in exercising their right to free speech, as provided by the constitution of Belarus. Needless to say, we also condemn the attacks on journalists, including Russian TV journalists, who tried to cover the demonstrations.
We are faced with a neighbouring country where one man on his own decides what is best for the population. Opposition and independent media are repressed, democracy is a far cry. And this is not a new situation: the situation has existed since 1996 when President Lukashenko abrogated the elected parliament, and changed the constitution to invest all the executive powers in the president, i.e. his own person.
It is not only in the interest of the Belarus people, but also in the European Union’s interest to have democracy, respect for human rights, peace, security and prosperity in this neighbouring country. So what can the European Union do to further developments in order to bring about a better life for the people of Belarus?
Since 1997, the European Union's relations with Belarus have been at a very low level. In that year the EU decided not to ratify the partnership and cooperation agreement with Belarus, in view of the abrogation of democracy in 1996. All technical assistance was stopped except if promoting democracy or humanitarian aid. After the presidential elections of 2001, when Lukashenko was re-elected, the EU decided to continue its strict policy towards the regime, but at the same time to try to continue and – if possible – to expand relations with civil society.
Unfortunately, the situation is only getting worse. The popular support of President Lukashenko diminishes, and the regime – as a reaction – gets more and more oppressive. So what can the EU do about it, in terms of both carrots and sticks?
Firstly, what has the EU to offer? In order to bring about an area of peace, security and prosperity the EU has developed the European Neighbourhood Policy. If Belarus decides to choose the path of democracy and rule of law, where the population decides on its own economic and political future, the EU is prepared to make Belarus the same offer as other neighbouring countries. Of course we should not offer this whilst Belarus is not making any changes.
But how big is this carrot? As prosperity in the new EU Member States neighbouring Belarus grows along with democratic stability, this may be expected to have a strong psychological effect on the people of Belarus. This will hopefully be an irreversible process."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples