Nagorno-Karabakh: Russia deploys 1960 peacekeepers

Brussels 09.11.2020 According to Russian TASS Agency a peacekeeping contingent of the Russian Federation will be deployed along the line of contact in Nagorno-Karabakh and along the Lachin corridor in the amount of 1,960 servicemen with small arms, 90 armored personnel carriers, 380 units of automobile and special equipment, the statement signed by Russia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan says. President Putin confirmed the decision to send peacekeepers in an TV addresse.

The peacekeeping contingent of the Russian Federation is being deployed in parallel with the withdrawal of the Armenian armed forces. The duration of the stay of the peacekeeping contingent of the Russian Federation is 5 years with automatic extension for the next 5-year periods, if none of the Parties declares 6 months before the expiration of the period of intention to terminate the application of this provision.

In order to increase the effectiveness of control over the implementation of the agreements by the Parties to the conflict, a peacekeeping center is being deployed to control the ceasefire.

The Republic of Armenia will return the Kelbajar region to the Republic of Azerbaijan by November 15, 2020, and the Lachin region by December 1, 2020, while leaving behind the Lachin corridor (5 km wide), which will ensure the connection of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia and at the same time not will affect the city of Shusha.

By agreement of the Parties, in the next three years, a plan for the construction of a new traffic route along the Lachin corridor will be determined, providing communication between Stepanakert and Armenia, with the subsequent redeployment of the Russian peacekeeping contingent to protect this route.
The Republic of Azerbaijan guarantees traffic safety
along the Lachin corridor of citizens, vehicles and goods in both directions.

Internally displaced persons and refugees return to the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and adjacent areas under the control of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

The exchange of prisoners of war and other detained persons and bodies of the dead is carried out.

EU vs.Trump+33,284,020 Republicans

Brussels 08.11.2020 Anna van Densky OPINION On November 7 the Saturday evening in his Tweet micro blog the EU top diplomat Josep Borrell congratulated Democrat Joe Biden, who proclaimed himself the President-elect of the U.S. in spite of the wide-spread protest of the Republicans who openly accused their opponents in endemic fraud with postal ballots. Meanwhile Georgia State top election official has dispatched a team of investigators after a ballot “issue” was discovered in one of the counties most responsible for giving former
Joe Biden (D) the lead over President Trump (R). The U.S. election process is clearly not over.

However soon Josep Borrell was shortly joined by the European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, who said she was looking forward to working with “President Biden”, following the European leaders footsteps: Boris Johnson, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, who also rushed to congratulate Mr.Biden.

The question is what happens when the Republicans start their lawsuits in the Courts, demanding investigation into fraud, and re-count of the votes? The was one 20 years ago in Florida in 2000 during contest between George W. Bush and Al Gore. The Florida vote was settled in Bush’s favour by a margin of 537 votes in manual recount in Bush v. Gore lawsuit.

Nowadays while the mainstream media has announced Nevada and the election race in favour of Joe Biden (D), President Trump’s campaign claims that the race is not over and litigation is just beginning on Monday, November 9.

Governor Kristi Noem (R-South Dakota) noted on November 8 on ABC’s “This Week” programme that during the 2000 election, former Vice President Al Gore was given 37 days to run the process of legal challenges to the election.
Therefore, she said we should “afford the 70.6 million Americans that voted for President Trump the same consideration.” She has also underlined that it was not only about this election, it was about the entire institution, and if Joe Biden was not willing to “break-up the nation” he should allow the legal process to take place to proof that he had really won. The governor’s words were reflecting the position of the Trump voters, who point at too many evidences of fraud during the postal ballot count.

In case in legal procedures there will be no change of results in his favour, President Trump’s term expires at midday on January 20, 2021, and many leaders are showing reserve unlike the EU top executives, who rushed with their congratulations to a candidate who they consider to be more favourable to the EU project.

Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said he would not congratulate Biden on his victory until all legal challenges are resolved. Similar stance took Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China Xi Jinping.
There was silence from President Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, and many others who preferred not to gamble. From the other hand, they wished to keep good working relations with the Republicans, respecting their concerns of illegitimate postal ballots.

Even if the lawsuits fail to establish the ballots count, allowing President Trump to stay in the White House for the second term, there are strong inclinations for Republicans to stay in control of the Senate, meaning the prospects of Mr.Biden to fulfil his campaign promises are dim, and the EU executive rush wishing him well largely misplaced. The neutrality of Europe would deliver more in every sense, keeping good relations with both camps, defining the ties with the EU as a bipartisan issue.

“Golden” passports vs. migrants welcome

Brussels. 30.10.2020 The EU President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen tweeted that she condemned the “hideous act” in the Church Notre Dame in Nice, and the head of the EU diplomacy Josep Borrell tweeted that he was “shocked” by the “barbarism”. But do they really believe that the Islamist radicals care what the EU leaders think about their attacks? To whom do they address their condemnation?
To the radicals, who are considering themselves the “martyrs in Islam”, offering the ultimate sacrifice to Allah Akbar?..

(Image: actress, and devote Catholic Nadine Devillers, victim of Nice attack).

The assailant, who was kindly assisted by the Italian Red Cross, issuing him a document, when he landed at Lampedusa, had been less than a month in France, when he had undertaken gruesome knife attack against Christians in a central church of Nice out of ideological motives, shouting “Allah Akbar!”, while stabbing, slitting throats, and cutting off head of an elderly woman. It did not look like he new any of his three victims, who came for the morning prayer.

What the “condemnation” of the EU top executives mean in practical terms of protection of human life (European Convention of Human Rights Article 2 – right to life)?
“Thought with families of victims”, “shock from barbarism” are only words, which protect no one.
The EU has launched an infringement procedure against Cyprus and Malta for “golden passport” scheme, exchanging citizenship for investment into economy. But why there are no infringement procedures against Italy and France, for neglecting Article 2 of European Human rights Convention, neglecting Islamist threat, and allowing extremists to acquire permits to stay, converted later to citizenship?

The served head of the teacher Samuel Paty by Chechen radical, or Chechen-Maghreb gangs fighting for drug traffic, – all these crimes have one feature in common: unrestricted access to settle in France to abuse the democracy, profiting from its fruit, and denying the values of the hosting society.

It is time to face the reality: for more than a half of Muslims living in Europe Sharia law is more important than the civil law, and even more so for the newcomers, who by no means are interested to embrace European cultures, but to preserve their own, they have fled.

The European Commission has started an infringement procedure against Cyprus and Malta over European citizenship, which should not be “for sale”, but should it be granted freely to any migrant landing in Europe under asylum-seeking pretext? What is “dignifying” about distribution of the European permits and passports for migrants with obscure past and dim plans for future? Denouncing 800 Maltese “golden passports” to distribute more than half-a-million yearly to migrants whose claim is based on the length of stay. It is useful to remember that the very idea of ‘naturalisation’ is entirely “Western”, and is not practised across the world.

The trend of beheading in France should remind us about the history of asylum-seeking which was launched in Colonial era (1951), when nobody could imagine that the entire Africa would be free, and these Conventions of Geneva would be used to move populations massively from one continent to another, allowing Islamists to infiltrate. Nowadays there are more than 8 000 radicals in France on the surveillance list “S”, and 400 are not in possession of any valid document to stay. 

The “golden passports” scheme “undermines the European values” the EU civil servants claim, but indiscriminate welcome to migrants undermines the “right to life” of the European citizens. The issue that continues to be neglected and overlooked. 

Image above: Nadine Devillers, victime of Nice Notre Dame cathedral attack during her last performance in Phoenix theratre.

Curfew against virus

Brussels 14.10.2020 Tonight the speech of President Macron is awaited in many EU capitals: will he apply method of curfew as a tool of defeating COVID-19 pandemic also in the Hexagone? Neighbouring Belgium has already imposed this drastic measure from 14 October in some provinces.

Several French media evoked the possibility of curfews in the most affected territories of the V-th Republic, the strategy promoted by the president of the National Academy of Medicine, the former Minister of Health Jean-François Mattéi.

The curfew option is also being considered by the Covid-19 Scientific Council in an alert note dated September 22. The body chaired by Jean-François Delfraissy recalls that a curfew has notably been introduced in Guyana, where Jean Castex went shortly after his appointment to Matignon.

At this stage of the epidemic, the Scientific Council does not envisage proposing the option (of a curfew) at the national level, but cannot exclude its use in certain metropolitan areas and of course in the event of deterioration. later ”, the text of this note reads, which mentions curfews for a period of a fortnight.

On Monday, October 12, referring to a “very difficult” situation facing the “reality of a second epidemic wave”, the Prime Minister, Jean Castex, did not rule out the new period of re-confinement in the country where the health crisis will last according to him several more months. (However the World Bank in its documents mentions 15 month of the second wave).

“General re-confinement must be avoided by all means,” the head of government told France Info, referring to the “absolutely dramatic” consequences of such a drastic measure. “Nothing should be excluded when we see the situation in our hospitals,” he replied when asked about possible local.

The Scientific Council warns that the population’s support for such a measure would be “probably weak, with detrimental effects in terms of social cohesion and confidence” and indicates that its economic cost would be “all the greater as it occurs. after a first period of confinement and that it feeds negative economic expectations with potentially disastrous effects ”.

As in other European countries, France is facing a marked deterioration in health indicators this autumn. The threshold of 1,500 patients treated in intensive care for a Covid-19 infection was crossed again on Monday for the first time since May 27.

One of the leading world experts in virology Professor Didier Raoult initially regretted “the global state of nervous crisis in which the country is dived”, while invited by CNews to comment on certain measures taken by political authorities in regions of France to slow the spread of Covid-19.

“It is beyond reason and understanding,” he proclaims. “This leads to adopting strategies that put more health at risk.”

Mali: EU-ECOWAS democratic dogmatism

Brussels, 20.09.2020 Anna van Densky, OPINION: An extraordinary pressure on Mali officers to transfer power to civilians without delay paves the way to one more failed state on the map of the world. During the anti-government protests, which led to the coup d’état, ousting of President Keita, there has been no single political force able to offer a comprehensive programme to reform the Sahel country and direct it firmly to the democratic future. Moreover, there is not such a clear path to democracy for Malians, plagued by extremism, sectarian conflict, ethnic divisions, and endemic corruption.

The European Union (EU)- the avid supporter of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) efforts in Mali- actively promotes a model of the democratic institutions, run by the civilians, without any consideration of the context, and previous failures of the similar kind – the state-building in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and in Libya. Nowadays the ECOWAS, flanked by the European diplomacy, is pushing Malians towards pro-forma return to the “Constitutional” order, denouncing the idea of the country run by the military for the next 18 months. However the energetic push is performed in absence of a coherent strategy in dealing with corrupt and ineffective state structures, and detached local communities doomed to isolation in absence of adequate infrastructures. Last, but not least is the factor of the general instability in the region, aggravated by rise of Islamists in Sahel, affiliated with Al-Qaeda and Islamic State aiming to restore the legendary Caliphate of Sokoto.

Sadly the list of problems does not end here, the Tuareg dream of creation of an independent state in the north of Mali – Azawad – has never faded, but retreated for time being under pressure of the overwhelming French army, while the experts unanimously admitted that there is no military solution to the ethnic conflict, and invited the belligerent parties to resolve the conflict at the negotiation table defining the region future status within Malian state. So far in vain.
Back in 2012, while declaring the independence, Azawad leaders claimed that Mali was an “anarchic state”, and Tuareg liberation movement has opted for a military transition period, to ensure the protection of their land and conducting the transition to the democratic institutions. The massacre (2014) of the Tuareg civilians by Fulani-Islamists has been too recent to be forgotten. Not least are the tensions between Tuareg and Chadians, caused by massacres of the civilians by Chadian army in the North of Mali in the region of Kidal.
In short, not only a clear path to democracy is absent, but also there is no path in view for national unity, allowing to construct a functional political system producing a corruption-free credible government, leading way to economic recovery, and well-being of regular Malians.
Struck by multiple systemic conflicts, causing a permanent state of crises, Malians are not able to rise out of poverty, in spite of the remarkable natural wealth.
The profound misunderstanding of capacities of a new born protest movement of 5 June (M5) to become a constructive political force over night will result in further turmoil in political life, and cause even more resent of the citizens, searching for responses to their justified claims. Being the prime victims of the ECOWAS blockade, the regular Malians will turn to an available alternative, finding warm welcome by the anti-Occident militant groups, and the extremists will rise again, feasting on poverty, and frustrations of communities.
The five thousand strong French military corps, fulfilling the counter-terrorist operation Barkhane in Sahel region has limited capacity to deal with the consequences of the ongoing failed state drama in Mali, and it would be too naive to expect them to defeat jihad, in absence of the state-building process.
The EU is a major donor of assistance in Mali, providing more than €350 million in humanitarian aid in the country since the beginning of the crisis in 2012, adding to €23 million in 2020. However the Europeans contribute without any pragmatic plans for the future of the country, preferring in the current crisis to support the ECOWAS blindly, joining the pro forma claims of civilian government, without any consideration of its notoriously poor quality, leading to the current state of affairs, while under President Keita 40% of state purse vanished in pockets of corrupt civil servants.
The ECOWAS-EU strategy of pressure on the Malian army by imposing border and financial transactions blockade, will destroy the relations with Malian patriotic officers, and cause further impoverishment of Malians, pushing them into the arms of extremists of various calibre.
Mali is far too significant to the West Africa to allow the Europeans to leave it alone, watching it’s descending to chaos, but it is far too big as a challenge to resolve the complex of state-building and security problems, through simplified linear punitive measures.
Recent Ursula von der Leyen sanctions policy concept will create nothing but remorse and discontent among Malians, who today still regard Europe as a friend. The enduring threat of Islamic extremism requires elaborate and flexible European diplomacy, navigating the country to effective forms of governance. Further escalation of tensions in name of democracy and “Constitutional order” will produce exactly the opposite effect – an explosion. An explosion, throwing Malians into hands of kleptocratic clans of war-lords, descending into chaos.
Instead of fearing of a hypothetical dictatorship led by Colonel Hassimi Goita as deviation from the imaginary path to democracy, the EU should embrace the co-operation with the patriotic and secular Malian army as the constructive force in disposal of capabilities to introduce reform, and allowing the political process to thrive towards the meaningful free and fair elections concluding the suggested transition period.
Let us not forget that Kemal Ataturk, and General de Gaulle were military man, however their remarkable contribution to democracy is ways more significant, than of many other statesmen in civilian suits. Rejection of enthusiasm of young generation of Mali officers, aiming at reforming their country and nation-building will end in one more fiasco, making Mali to follow the path of the other failed states. It is clear there are not simple answers to Malian crisis, and the obsession with the civilian rule, achieved by imposing de facto sanctions, will result in a huge bill for the European tax-payer for the humanitarian aid, and ever-growing burden for the French army, combating extremism in Sahel, transforming into another Afghanistan.
The EU diplomacy, led by Josep Borrell needs to regard the context, abandoning dogmatism in promoting of democracy and rule of law in Mali, and become flexible and adaptive, formulating short, medium and long-term goals, working on achievement of them in stages, with a focus on long-term stability of both Mali and Sahel.
Moreover, the EU needs to built genuine partnership with the Malian armed forces, investing in development of their capabilities to defend Malian state, and combat extremism. The essential element of the EU success in promotion of the democracy, is the demonstration of a genuine interest in problems of Malians, and readiness to compromise in search for attaining long-lasting common goals, as stability, prosperity and lasting peace.

However, today, when the Malian state is in a profound crisis, and its future is in peril, nothing is so detrimental to promotion of the European values in Sahel, as dogmatism and forceful imposition of European concepts within fragile Sahel context. Mali is on the crossroads, it is up to the EU to decide if it wishes to contribute to the push of the Malians down the slope, following Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, direction of the failed state, fanatically exporting European concepts to vast spaces of African Savannah.
Will the EU diplomacy in Mali adapt or become obsolete? The ability of the bloc to change, adapt and experiment will become far more significant in Sahel, than the capacity to punish and sanction. Above all, it makes little sense from the EU behalf to appeal to legality and return to the constitutional order – “Necessitas non habet legem” – Necessity has no law.

#SOTEU: Leyen formal debut

The traditions September State of the Union Speech (#SOTEU) of the European Commission president has been the first one for Ursula von der Leyen. The address before the European Parliament took place in Brussels, instead of Strasbourg, because of the coronavirus restrictions.
On 16 September in her first #SOTEU speech, she shared her vision for a stronger Europe and a better world after the coronavirus pandemic, radiating obligatory for her status enthusiasm over the EU radiant future.
However if in tone the speech did not deviate from the EU classical tradition of depicting the project as the ever-growing and successful endeavour in essence it broke with the tradition,because COVID-19 pandemic, vaccination of humanity, and related issued became the major focus, causing compression, and sidelining of many other policies – international relations became one of these areas of shrinking attention.

The overview of the EU external relations started with China, and ended with Africa with Enlargement and Neighbourhood policies squeeze in between, and complimented with haphazard mentioning of human rights. The compression of the foreign affairs chapter was striking,leading to frantic dashes from Uyghurs to Magnitsky Act, from Salisbury poisoning of former Russian secret service agent to migrant camps in Turkey.

President von der Leyen has been mixing the issues and problems with vague promises, and warnings of international politics as a disc jokey (DJs) mixes melodies, weather forecasts and advertising. The speech has been delivered on time, and almost entirely in English language in spite of the fact it is used only in two of the bloc members – Malta and Ireland – which constitute one per cent of the EU population. This Anglophilia was largely misplaces, taking into consideration the recent British Prime Minister consideration to opt for no-deal exit.

According to British press Boris Johnson will present an ultimatum to negotiators in coming days, demanding the UK and Europe to agree a post-Brexit trade deal by 15 October or Britain will step out without any agreement at all. Under the circumstances von der Leyen choice of English language looked rather submissive, and even masochistic, dissonating with major tones of the oratory, mixing cheerful slogans and staccato warnings.
“And the band played on…”

Mali political crisis

Mali’s political crisis deepened further when the opposition M5-RFP rejected the Charter negociated by the officers led by Colonal Assimi Goita and the ECOWAS. The stalemate is about than whether a civilian or a soldier should lead the transition. What looks like a crisis of confidence, in reality is a wrestling for power, while interests of Malians go begging. The country is suffering from block of the borders, and freezing of financial transations as a reaction of Mali neigbours to coup d’etat of August 18. Here is my comment for the Eye on Africa TV.

EU «wahsed hands» of Belarus

#Belarus #Lukahsenko #BelarusProtests
Anna van Densky OPINION Today, on August 19, an extraordinary meeting of the Council of the EU on the situation in Belarus took place by teleconferencing.

The feeble answer has surprised many. The EU leaders have not pronounced the name of the genuine elections winner Svetlana Tikhanovskaya even once (!)While being so ardent about Ukraine integration into the bloc, why showing so little engagement towards dramatic events in Belarus?

First of all the context has entirely changed for the Europenan Union as an internationl organisation, transcending a profound systemic crisis itself. The bloc is in a difficult economic and financial situation because of the pandemic and because of the Brexit. The UK, the second largest contributor to the EU’s coffers, has left the organization and there is no trade agreement yet, and most likely will be none, which will create a considerable number of the economic problems in short, medium and long term.

At present the economy of Belarus is integrated into Russian and it is also orientated to the former Republics of the USSR, exporting there machinery. What is especially lucrative is the export of agricultural products to Russia, while it would be not easy to find the replacement for clients at the EU market, which has a surplus of agricultural products to an extend that the farmers receive funds not to produce, and not to develop the arable lands.

The dependency of Belarus on Russian hydrocarbons (Yamal gaz pipline) is a common place, and does not need any additional clarifications; the machinery, produced for former Republics either.

Regarding political transition to democracy from Lukashenko authoritarian rule, the major riddle is how to integrate the country into the EU politically, while it’s economic foundation is firmly intertwined with Russian Federation, and former Soviet bloc.

The defence issue is not less problematic: joining the CSTO, Belarus became a military ally of Russia. Certainly it can cancel the CSTO membership, but the maximum of what can be achieved afterwards from the army and the people is military neutrality. Due to its history, the country will opt for neutrality policy, since the people do not sympathise with NATO and, unlike Ukraine and Georgia, there has never been any talk of joining the North Atlantic Alliance for Belarus.

And here the geopolitical level of the issue is reached: there is no point in integrating a country into the EU which will not host military bases of the United States, and even less so joining the the North Atlantic Alliance. If the Belarussians keep Lukashenko in disdain, it does not mean that they are ready to join the “belt of infidelity” and serve Western interest, regarding Russia as a foe, as Ukrainians and Georgians are eagerly doing.

Taking into consideration mentioned above one should not expect active political support and financial assistance to Belarus from the EU similar the one they offer to Ukraine and Georgia.

A policy of sanctions against Lukashenko’s entourage has already been chosen by the EU, which is related to the policy of sanctions againstRussia and will be further harmonized with it. De facto, what looks like support to Belarussians will be an additional package of sanctions against Russian economy.

Subsequently further retention of Lukashenko in power by allies in Moscow is not only meaningless, but frankly detrimental to the economic interests of Russia, because they will be used by the West as a tool for expanding sanctions. Lukashenko life-long presidency will also significantly deteriorate image of Vladimir Putin in domestic politics, and deepening of the Belarussian crisis will have a negative impact on the entire range of Russian interests at home and abroad.

In their best interest Russians shouldn’t hold on to the political corpse of Lukashenko, but should arrange his swift and humble funeral and turn their attention to the other contemporary political players preferred by Belarus people:

The king is dead! Long live the king!”.

Inauguration of incumbent President Lukashenko one more time will take place in two month, Russian TASS new agency reported. He has been Belarus authoritarian ruler for 26 years, who came to power as a “new type of leader” in last millenium and stayed due to his “clinch” with power for almost three decades, erasing smallest signs of dissent.

Belarus future and EU aid

Anna Van Densky OPINION #Belarus #Minsk #Lukashenko #BelarusProtests #Tikhanovskaya

The proposal to facilitate the engagement into “political dialogue” between the discredited Lukashenko regime and people of Belarus the EU has announced, looks like a stillbirth already, because the entire crisis is created by the blunt refusal of compromise between the authoritarian model, and democratic pluralism. Moreover it is impossible for Lukashenko to accept any compromise, because it will mean the definitive dismantling of his rusty “last dictatorship of Europe”.

Reacting upon the political crisis the president of the EU Council Charles Michel delcrared the start of the work on creating of the sanctions lists of the leading figures from the government responsible for repressions of the protestors, however they will remain a higly symbolical gesture in absence of the real political process of democratic transformaiton of Belarus.

The stubborn refusal of Lukahsnko to leave, his clinch with power, creates new, but predictable trubles, and a substantial challenge to the EU diplomacy, claiming ambition of being a global player.

However there are effective ways for the EU to promote democracy and political pluralism in Belarus instead of focusing on the punitive symbolism of sanctions. While the opposition leader, and the major challenger of the incumbent President Lukashenko, Svetalana Tikhanovskaya expressed her readiness to become a national leader in the transition period in order to organize new free and fair elections, the EU could give an unequivocal political support to her plan.

The proposal of leading the country towards new elections means that Svetlana Tikhanovaksya submits her personal victory in order to create opportunities for Belarus political Renaissance, opening the way of participation to all political prisoners and other candidates who were barred from the elections process at the intent of Lukashenko, who was announced an absolute victor of the elections, with the 80% of vote. The result has been widely considered considered as falsified not only by Belarus people, but also by the EU foreign ministers.

The question is if the European Union will support Svetlana Tikhanovakaya the same way as they supported Roza Otunbayeva, the President of the transition period in former Soviet Republic of Kyrgyzstan 10 years ago, after they overthrew of their dictaror. Then the top EU diplomat Baroness Ashton proposed to support Kyrgyzstan “politically, financially, technically” in order to ensure fundamental rights and freedoms to Kyrgyz people.

The role of the EU insitutions will be crucial in overcoming the political crisis and conducting democratic reforms in Belarus, establishing genuine pluralist political system, representing broad spectrum of interest and arbitation. The void, the absence of meaningful offer for practical aid from the behalf of the international community, reducing the EU role to the punitive measures as sanctions, will certainly allow the crisis to become protracted, and costly in all the senses to Belarussian people.
Moreover it might deteriorate further, creating conditions for chronic confrontation between people and Lukahsnko apparatchiks, and part of the police and military, still defending the discredited regime. This will lead to general fatigue, and loss of opportunities for promotion of genuine democracy. (Formally Belarus Republic is a democratic state).

In this context plagued by refusal of the authoritarian Lukahshenko regime to accept the justified demands of the people of Belarus, the EU aid to opposition, led by Tikhanovskaya and supported by the majority of citizens, is becoming pivotal in introduction of the democratic change to ensure definitive collapse of the last dictatorship of Europe. However the time is crucial to avoid new victims in the ongoing struggle between antipodes without any perspective of compromise. Instead of attempting to reconcile irreconcilable in the best interest of Europe is to invest in Belarus progress without delay.

Belarus: Lukashenko poisoned chalice

Anna van Densky OPINION Isn’t it time for Alexander Grigorievich to book one-way ticket to Dushanbe? He is very fond of mountain landscapes there, and, he himself has repeatedly stated that he «loves» Tajikistan for «similarity» to Belarus. No wonder – Tadjik President Rahmon will soon face the challenge of the fifth re-election, however in less lively political context.

Anyway, from the common sense perspectvie one way ticket to Duchanbe is much better than spending time in a prison cell in The Hague. And after what Lukahsenko has done, there is no chance of a quiet and serene old age, enjoying Belaveja forest in his native Belarus.

Ordering crakdown on peaceful protestors, claiming they are «people with criminal past and unemployed», Lukashenko demonstrated to what extent he lost touch with the reality, conducting Stalinist repressions in the digital age. Opressing the citizens of the Republic for their refusal to believe that his 80% eelction victory was genuine, he slided along the downspiral of self-destruction. However his poisoned chalice of elections triumph turning into a disaster was entirely self-inflicted, and rooted in his Europe Last Dictator dramatically outdated authoritarian style.

Nowadays the images of Belarus police violence, causing bruises, wounds, broken heads and arms, and videos of complainants of torture under arrest, all these images are floating across social networks around the world among four billion users!

The EU had no choice but start preparing “strong measures” in response to Lukashenko massive abuses of fundamental rights of the citizens of Belarus, addressing an old problem of the «Last Dictator of Europe».

However, not only the West is shocked by Lukashnko assault for life-long preisdency after 26 years of uninterrupted autoritarian rule, but appartnely Moscow is also concerned about the revolution he provoked by brutal power grab. After all Kremlin is also obliged to think about the image in the global world, and is not eager to convert Russia to a grave-yard for the political corpses of failed dictatros.

So the only way out is a ticket to Duchanbe (Stalinabad). And with some luck Alexander Grigorievich gains some prominence there, advising President Rahmon whether to run for the FIFTH TIME in October, or maybe hand over the post to his eldest son, or even someone else …

Once upon a time just a chairman of a collective farm in a poor village in Belarus Soviet Republic, nowadays Lukashenko has such a rich experience of a statesman that he can easily capitalize on his services to other presidents for life, willing to keep the grip on power for long. He can advise them on mistakes to be avoided, using his own scandalous affair of falsifications of elections, causing his downfall.

Surely Lukashenko advice will be in high demand, and even a commercial success, and when the list of the dictators will come to the end, he could buy a farm and start doing what he does best – raising chickens 🙂

Cock-a-doodle-do!