Lukashenka instructed the government to compensate for the losses of the republican budget due to the tax maneuver in the oil sector in Russia in any areas of cooperation with this country. The head of state set the corresponding task today at a meeting on the socio-economic development of the country in 2019 and approaches to the further development of integration areas, the official website of the president reports.

"This is not a disaster"

Alexander Lukashenko spoke about the results of the talks with Vladimir Putin held at the end of December. The parties, in particular, discussed issues of compensation to the Belarusian side in connection with the tax maneuver in Russia in the oil sector.

- There was no rejection on the issue of compensation. It was not that Russia says: "No, we will not compensate for your worsening of the situation, your losses." Moreover, the President of Russia suggested continuing negotiations on this issue in the new year and working out an acceptable solution - both one-on-one and in the composition of working groups,- said the president.

He noted that this issue would have to be resolved before January 1, but there is no catastrophe due to the fact that it has not been resolved yet.

- Losses from the tax maneuver in Belarus this year will amount to a ridiculous amount: at $70 per barrel it will be about $400 million. This is not a disaster. But we cannot agree to this, because since 2015, when this tax maneuver was introduced, we have already lost $3.6 billion. Before the end of this tax maneuver, by 2025, we will lose $10.6 billion,- cited Lukashenka's calculations.

"We hoped for the best"

- We cannot bear the losses compared to the level of the last year. Therefore, all losses must be compensated for in one or another area of ​​cooperation with the Russian Federation,- set a task for Lukashenka's government. - I said this to the President of Russia, no matter how painful and regrettable it was, and I repeat it publicly, and bring it to your attention as an instruction from the President of Belarus. You must execute it flawlessly and with precision. We have nothing to lose.

Lukashenka drew attention to the fact that the actions of the Russian side contradict the spirit and letter of all agreements, including within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union.

- In Russia, someone says: “We have no obligation to compensate. Nowhere is this in the union treaties is not spelled out. To which I ask a direct question: “So, when we signed these agreements (on the Union State, the EAEU), we counted on a constant deterioration in the economic situation due to some internal actions of the Russian Federation?” No. We hoped for the best Alexander Lukashenko said.

He added that in those years there was no talk of tax maneuvers. The parties could not foresee this moment in the agreements, because there was not even a thought that such questions would arise. “There was a general wording - “prevention of deterioration in our relations,” the president remarked.

“We must negotiate on a set of issues”

Previously, negotiations were already held to compensate for the losses of the Belarusian side, and at them appropriate mechanisms were developed and sources identified. Representatives of Russia publicly announced the solution of this issue in a positive way for Belarus. However, soon, Alexander Lukashenko recalled, the Russian side abruptly stopped the negotiations, not refusing compensation, but at the same time declaring the need to deepen integration processes.

- To the question, what are these integration processes, the Russians have no answer yet. When I asked to name what the Russian Federation wants from Belarus today in terms of integration, there was no direct answer. And we, at the suggestion of the Russian Federation, agreed that these issues should be identified and attempted to be resolved in the work of joint groups,- said the head of state.

At the end of 2018, such working groups were created. The Russian side is represented by the head of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia Maxim Oreshkin, the Belarusian side is represented by the Minister of Economy Dmitry Krutoy.

- I absolutely support the proposals that there should be officials of the highest level, not only specialists. We must negotiate on a set of issues that are outlined in the union treaty. In the first place (this was the proposal of the President of Russia), we must put issues that must be addressed as a matter of priority: economic and financial,- the head of state drew attention.

At the same time, he stressed that decisions on all issues have long been made, but, according to Alexander Lukashenko, the Russian government forgot about it, informing the Russian leader.

A little libation. What is the tax maneuver?

Since this year, Russia has begun a tax maneuver, which it plans to complete in 2024. Its essence is that the neighboring country will reduce the export duty on oil from 30% to 0. At the same time, they will increase the tax on the extraction of minerals. Why does this concern Belarus? Because Belarus did not pay an export duty on hydrocarbons and, when transiting oil outside the country, it collected the duty itself and left this money in the budget.

Now, due to the fact that oil producers will pay tax, the price of oil will automatically rise for Belarus almost to the world level: according to preliminary estimates, the cost of oil for us this year will be $416 per ton, which is almost 75% of the world price for oil. Further hydrocarbons will only rise in price.

“The population should not feel any additional burden”

The President recalled that this year it is planned to complete the modernization of two Belarusian oil refineries, after which Belarus will be able to buy oil for further processing not only from Russia.

I have set a task for a long time, and we need to solve it: to open an alternative oil supply through the Baltic ports. If the Lithuanians do not agree, negotiate with the Latvians and buy this oil. Refining at the Novopolotsk oil refinery and supplying the Baltic republics,” Lukashenka said.

According to him, it will be cheaper for the Baltic countries than now, when they buy oil products at world prices.

We can agree that this will be our common oil, which we will process at the modernized Novopolotsk oil refinery. Moreover, we even have some opportunities in this regard,” Lukashenka noted.

The head of state urged not to exaggerate the problems associated with the losses of the Belarusian budget due to the tax maneuver in Russia, but to look for other reliable sources that compensate for these negative aspects.

But I want to warn you: do not even think about such solutions as shifting these problems onto the shoulders of our people, Belarusians, - he warned. - The population should not feel any additional burden. At least this year, next year, there are no problems at all, even if we did not compensate anything.

“We cannot force Russia”

According to the head of state, earning an additional $400 million is not a problem for Belarus.

In terms of purchasing power parity, as it is now commonly believed, Belarus' GDP is under $80 billion. What is the problem here? There is no such thing, Alexander Lukashenko is convinced.

The head of state asked the participants of the meeting about a comprehensive assessment of medium-term economic growth, the state of the budget, inflation levels and gold and foreign exchange reserves in the context of the tax maneuver. Alexander Lukashenko was also informed about the government's plans to develop additional sources of compensation for the tax maneuver.

Separately, the meeting discussed a set of issues of the country's socio-economic development, as well as interaction with partner countries in the formats of the EAEU and the CSTO.

Quick contact with the editors: read the Onliner public chat and write to us on Viber!

Copy the iframe

Together with the Kremlin benefits, the head of Belarus loses the need to adapt to Russia. In front of Putin's eyes, "the flies are separated from the cutlets." Alexander Lukashenko began to speak Belarusian. Three minutes was enough to create an information wave.

As it should be: Trump speaks English, Macron speaks French. Putin and Lukashenko are losing their common language… The President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko switched to my own:

“We are proud of our history and land, the Motherland of outstanding people, our compatriots. We know our roots, we celebrate traditions.”

The speech in the language of the titular nation, and even in a patriotic vein, became unexpected, but pleasant for the listeners. Lukashenka's language experiments were perceived ambiguously by people.

“Most people still speak Russian.”

"The president should speak to the people in their native language."

“One person is useless. It's not about him, it's about us."

"He did the right thing - I'm FOR!" - tell residents of Minsk.

Not such a friend of Belarusians… Lukashenka used the language of the titular nation only a few times, and in other cases, the language offended: “Nothing great can be expressed in Belarusian. The Belarusian language is a poor language. There are only two great languages ​​in the world – Russian and English.”

Through a referendum in 1995, he also deprived the language of the status of the state. Then the young leader headed for Russia and chose the appropriate language. Now he appeals to language in order to protect his power - believes Sergey Naumchik, Deputy of the Supreme Council of Belarus (1991-1996):

“In a situation when the Kremlin begins the takeover of Belarus, or rather, activates this process, he, as they say, instinctively (intuitively) felt that he needed to save himself.”

... through national identity, the basic components of which are language, history, coat of arms and flag ... In his 3-minute speech, Lukashenka mentioned that ...

“The very concept of “spiritual revival” for the Belarusian people is not just a beautiful metaphor.”

For a metaphor to become a reality, you need to take “difficult” steps, says Sergey Naumchik:

“Return the status of the Belarusian language as the only state language, return the Pursuit and the white-red-white flag, open Belarusian-language schools in Minsk and the regions, take a closer look at those pro-Russian organizations that operate in all, I emphasize, regions of Belarus.”

For a quarter of a century, the language has been developing in the non-state sector, is widely used in the media, and fights for native speakers through special projects, literature and the Internet. This year we have the opportunity to contribute to its return to official use - during the census, to indicate our Belarusian-speaking. But a quick result is achievable only through Lukashenka...

“Permanent transition to the Belarusian language would mean changes in state policy. This would be a signal that since it is possible at the top, then it is possible everywhere. And this signal would absolutely immediately be picked up by vertical ranks, ”explains a political observer for Radio Liberty Vitaly Tsygankov.

Indeed, at the moment - we see only a play on words. One in Russian, the second in Belarusian - just like in the recently presented anthem ... of the Union State.

Photo: REUTERS / Vasily Fedosenko / FORUM

The Belarusian president, the guarantor of independence, stunned the public with a statement that we can fail and eventually enter "belonging to a state". Some commentators immediately linked this alarmist statement with Vladimir Putin's recent visit to Minsk. What terrible thing could the distinguished guest say to the host tête-à-tête?

Photo kremlin.ru

Other analysts pay attention to context and audience. On that day, June 22, Alexander Lukashenko made another suggestion to the local vertical, this time in the Shklovsky district.

They glorified the Belarusian model, and now the prospect loomed failed state

Maybe the date had an effect (the day Hitler attacked the Soviet Union), but the fact is that Lukashenka, demanding at a meeting from the vertical "reinforced concrete" perform economic tasks, : “We are at the front. We will not survive these years, we will fail, which means that we will either have to join some state, or they will simply wipe their feet on us. And God forbid, they will unleash a war like in Ukraine.”

The Belarusian leader is known for harsh instructions. But he usually frightens officials with the fact that he will send him out with a broom or put on handcuffs. And here - neither more nor less than the skiff of the country is outlined. Well, or to put it more culturally, in the language of Western political science, then the natural failed state is a failed, failed state.

Political opponents of Lukashenka received a luxurious PR gift and immediately began to taunt: here it is, the result of the 24-year rule of the irremovable president and his special path, the soviet one - a country on the brink of an abyss.

Guess from three times which country you will have to enter, if anything

Naturally, the politicized public did not have painful thoughts about which country could swallow us up.

I remember that during the years of confrontation with Warsaw, Lukashenka stated that the Poles had half of Belarus on their maps as their lands. But it is impossible to imagine that NATO members Poland or Lithuania (where, yes, they remember the times of the Grand Duchy, which extended to the current Belarusian lands) would dare to attack the Russian ally with the risk of a world nuclear war. And Ukraine itself is afraid that the Kremlin will strike through Belarus.

What remains is Russia, the former metropolis, on which Belarus is catastrophically dependent in terms of resources, financial and economic terms. In addition, it was Russia with the annexation of Crimea and the conflict in the Donbass, the idea of ​​"Novorossiya" that showed that it does not shy away from redrawing borders by force, contrary to the Helsinki agreements.

It is also worth remembering that in 2002, after tense negotiations with Putin, Lukashenka voluntarily or unwittingly gave out juicy details that “divide Belarus into parts and include it in the Russian Federation” and what “Even Stalin would not have thought of such an option in his time”.

You will say: a lot of water has flowed under the bridge, Moscow has already waved its hand, abandoned plans for incorporation. But even today, not some marginal chauvinists, but a completely respectable Alexander Khramchikhin, deputy director of the Moscow Institute of Political and Military Analysis, writes in "Independent military review"(appendix to "Independent newspaper") in the context of the collapse of the USSR, which “The majority of Russian citizens do not consider fair a number of consequences of this collapse, including the passage of certain borders. And so Russia will instinctively strive to "restore itself".

The course of the author's thought leaves no doubt that under a certain set of circumstances, Moscow will not be tormented by pangs of conscience about the termination of Belarusian independence in one form or another. Let's take ours back.

"Nothing unites like a common threat"

The psychological feature of the current Belarusian president is that he often "talks out his own fears, phobias", noted in the comment for Naviny. by political scientist Valery Karbalevich, author of a large research book "Alexander Lukashenko: a political portrait".

“In this case, the fear is that the state is threatened by internal conflicts and increased external influence. Independence becomes vulnerable to external forces”- says Karbalevich.

From my side, Andrey Porotnikov, Analytical Project Manager Belarus Security Blog, in a comment for website drew attention to the fact that Lukashenka is not satisfied with the quality of public administration.

But at the same time, the analyst added, the official leader “not ready to change the system of public administration itself”. Therefore, Lukashenka is trying to stimulate officials by appealing to patriotism. It also resorts to "negative mobilization", because the "Nothing unites like a common threat", notes the interlocutor.

In his opinion, Lukashenka's mood could have been influenced by a not very successful one when he flew to Minsk on June 19 for a meeting of the Supreme State Council of the Union State. Porotnikov draws attention to the fact that the results of the event were very sparingly covered by official sources. He assumes that “Minsk did not get what it expected, Putin did not introduce any specifics into the expectations of the Belarusian authorities”.

Indeed, there is a great contrast with the results of the April meeting last year, when officialdom trumpeted that the two leaders agreed on everything. And in particular - about the end of the oil and gas war, which dragged on for more than a year.

Today, however, no loud statements have been made that, for example, they have agreed to bury the hatchet of the milk war. There remains uncertainty about gas prices, and with the issuance of regular credit tranches, and with the status, and with the mutual recognition of visas, and with other bilateral problems.

The analyst admits that Lukashenka, as "Experienced Manipulator" with his alarmist statement, he could also send a signal to the European Union, which really does not want new problems along the perimeter of its borders.

“And in general, this is a hint that such problems may arise, and then let's talk about how you can help”, - explains Porotnikov.

Indeed, the prospect of Putin's tanks appearing on the Western Bug is a convincing horror story for Europeans. They have already become softer towards the Belarusian regime, but Minsk wants there to be even less nit-picking, more flexibility and, most importantly, financial and economic assistance.

Putin does not have to scare, just take a break

Of course, we can dream up what and how Putin could pin his Belarusian partner to the wall. Maybe he wanted to post?

But let's not give in to the lure of speculation. Even the fact that economic issues are left hanging in the air is enough to inspire gloomy thoughts to the Belarusian leadership.

In other words, Putin has no need to scare or issue ultimatums. You can just take a royal pause and watch how Minsk friends panic.

Today's revival of the Belarusian economy is opportunistic and tied to the rise in oil prices. Since Belarus receives it from Russia without duties, it is possible to sell oil products to the West with a good margin. But tomorrow oil prices may fall again. Or a tax maneuver in the Russian oil industry will make Belarusian oil refining inefficient.

And then the harsh realities can point to the edge that cynical question that was rhetorically asked not so long ago in the fuss that made a fuss about a separate state with a certain “special” language? Like, it would be much easier to include both oil refining and the country itself into Russia.

What kind of reforms are there, pip on your tongue!

Yes, one can gush with indignation, accuse the authors of such publications of imperial thinking, disrespect for language and sovereignty, but the fact is that the Belarusian economy has not been able to grow, rebuild, diversify over the years of independence so much that Moscow has lost the opportunity to bring the country to its knees by several valve turns.

Moreover, for many years the bet was placed on Moscow becoming stingier and more pragmatic, and the Crimea completely frightened the Belarusian leadership.

However, attempts to diversify the economy are still weak. The lion's share of trade still falls on the eastern neighbor. Moreover, at all official bilateral get-togethers they chime in that mutual trade should be increased, now to $50 billion a year. Although this sounds somewhat schizophrenic given the official course of Minsk on the diversification of foreign economic relations.

We also found ourselves in colossal financial dependence on Russia, we owe a lot to it (only on state loans - about $7.3 billion). In addition, the Ostrovets nuclear power plant is being built using a Russian loan of $10 billion.

This is a trap. Yes, now the Belarusian authorities are on fire with the idea of ​​​​creating an IT country, but you can’t build it in three days or even three years. The High-Tech Park, to which Russian oil does not care, has so far generated an annual revenue of a billion dollars - this does not make the weather even on a Belarusian scale. In addition, they are trying to integrate the IT sector into the old system with unprofitable enterprises in the social industry and, in fact, agriculture. Cross snake and hedgehog.

And since the supreme will for such a transformation (and the next presidential election is creeping up, what kind of reforms are there, pip on your tongue), Belarus is destined to balance on the edge of the abyss. If they don’t join, then they won’t refuse the pleasure of “wiping their feet”.

"24445"

On December 14, President of the Republic of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko met with Russian journalists and for four hours told them about his attitude to various issues, the main of which was the issue of deepening the integration of Russia and Belarus in the format of the Union State.

Interregional cooperation is the key to successful partnership between Belarus and Russia. In general, I credit the interregional cooperation and the governors of the Russian Federation with the preservation of our union. Without them, there would be no such union today. Because in our relations, at least, probably twice there was such a period when we were on the verge of a break. And it went on at the level of the centers - the federal authorities and the authorities of Belarus. And then the regions saved our union.

There has not yet been a situation in which we would not have found a compromise. The Russian Federation is our strategic partner and ally. Just our people, our brothers, live there. Whoever they are: Russians, Chechens, Ingush, Jews, or some representative of another nationality from those over 100 nationalities that live in Russia. These are our brothers, because yesterday we lived in the same apartment, in the same state - the Soviet Union. And thank God that these good feelings have remained with the Belarusians and Russians ever since.

Integration positions in Belarus are unchanged. Together with others, we initiated the creation of alliances that exist today in the post-Soviet space. And we are ready to move on, but on the condition of reinforced concrete implementation of our agreements. Or for two, or in the EAEU, for five members of the Eurasian Economic Union. As you can see, we do not require anything extra. Agreed - must be fulfilled. That's all. If there is no fulfillment, there is no union. This is an absolutely natural and fair expectation from partners whose relations, as was originally supposed, should be built on equal terms and mutual trust...

When we talk about equal conditions, this does not mean putting everything together and dividing it equally. I also often say, if you take the wealth of Belarusians and Russians and divide it equally, Belarus will choke. We do not need so much, we will not master it. We need only what we are supposed to, that we can earn with our own hands and brains. We do not need anything else, if only there were no obstacles so that this could be created. Therefore, we demand an equal basis for any union. If, as is often the case in Russia, we will be frank, proceed from the fact that we are so huge, and you are smaller, so this is how it will be, then there is nothing to agree on. This is not a union.

It is important to note that on the outer contours Belarus and Russia, as befits allies, are united in their assessments of world geopolitics. We support each other in multilateral organizations. Together we are implementing a program of coordinated actions in the field of foreign policy, coordinating approaches to the problems of regional and pan-European security, including in the sphere of countering new challenges and threats. But most of all we are connected by a common history, culture, glorious working times, experienced together.

A few years ago, at a similar meeting, I said that Belarus could become a certain moral factor for Russia. Frankly, we have always strived for this. So that you appreciate us, if already quite frankly. Maybe then not everyone paid attention to these words, but their relevance today has only increased. If you follow The Tale of Bygone Years, then both the Krivichi and the northerners descended from the Polotsk people, which means that here, on Belarusian soil, is the spiritual root of the entire Russian north-west: Smolensk, Pskov, Bryansk, Belgorod and Kursk. Maybe that's why in our country any conflict in the Slavic world is perceived especially hard and painfully.

Media space often becomes a hotbed of conflict. We must be aware of the responsibility for every spoken and written word. If it destroys the world and cripples the fate of people, then it puts the journalist on a par with soldiers who shoot to kill. And some say that you are a weapon of mass destruction, and I agree with that. It sounds harsh, but how else to reach out to those who ignore the norms of not only professional ethics, but also human morality. No less harm to society today causes a general depressive information background.

Next year, Belarus and Russia will celebrate our 20th anniversary, the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty on the Establishment of the Union State, as well as the first anniversary - 5 years of the Eurasian Economic Union. Together we have traveled a path that is not always easy, but very productive and rich in good deeds. Whatever the roughness, we always found mutual understanding. Obviously, any problems can be solved only together and only through cooperation. This is evidenced by a series of international summits, the G20, the EAEU, the CSTO. Only powerful integration associations are capable of responding to the global challenges of our time. Even a major power cannot cope alone.

As for the "union Schengen": I think there will be no problems. It's just that this document has not passed domestic procedures, but most importantly, I haven't seen it yet. It so happened, it rarely happens that a document is being discussed at the allied Council of Ministers, and the president has not seen it. Indeed, only last night he came to me. Therefore, there is only one reason that we did not make a conclusion at the presidential level. This is the last resort in our domestic procedures, probably in Russia exactly the same. Therefore, I think it will not be a problem, signing this agreement. Moreover, as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs informs me, all the wishes of both Belarusians and Russians are taken into account. If so, then there will be no problems.

Recently, a lot of questions have accumulated, difficult questions that are not being resolved, and the proposals, first of all, by the Russian leadership, violate the letter and, most importantly, the spirit of all our agreements. For example, the pricing of natural gas. This is the basis of our joint Belarusian-Russian economy. We agreed that in the middle of this year we would make a decision right up to 2025, but Russia did not even begin negotiations, although Putin and I agreed on this then in St. Petersburg. Agreed - we need to move. We don't know what will happen in 2020. And we consume 25 billion cubic meters of natural gas. At the same time, we spoke about this very often: we do not demand low gas prices. We do not demand, give us 70 dollars, as in Smolensk. Today we have 2-3 times more expensive gas. We do not require this. We demand that our agreements be fulfilled, they permeate all our agreements and treaties on equal conditions for business entities.

Today you have 70 - everyone should have 70, tomorrow 200 - 200 everyone should have. Equal conditions are needed.

We have lost almost $3.5 billion over the three years of the maneuver. He's been going for three years now. Even before 2024, according to various estimates, we will lose up to $10.8 billion. That is a worsening situation. In fact, the foundation of our union, to which you called us, is being destroyed. And what do you think, if we hadn’t received assurances then, we didn’t have an agreement that every year in Belarus and Russia people’s lives would improve, and economic entities would be happy to develop their business, we would go into this union? Yes, never in my life! There was an ironclad agreement: equal conditions for people, for business entities - well, for everything in order to develop this integration. Today, not by washing, so by rolling it is crossed out. And in connection with this, there were talks that integration is failing. But wait, we are still with the president (of Russia. - Red.) have not met, if we do not agree, then there will be a gaping hole in our integration, the foundation of our integration, the financial and economic foundations of our integration.

It will never be in Belarus, as in Ukraine, never. Only an idiot in Belarus after me, with me this will definitely not happen, can go for it. Because this is our greatest asset - the union of Belarus and Russia.

I wonder when we are told that the solution to the maneuver will be when there is deeper integration in the Union State. And some directly say, well, we are not yet ready for you to become part of Russia with six regions. Well, point. I can read, and you, too, probably between the lines. And I understand these hints.

It can be easier to say: listen, get oil, but let's destroy the country and join Russia. I always ask the question: these are the things, what are they being done for? Is Russia ready to accept Belarus as regions or as a whole into Russia today? You think about the consequences. Are you ready for this? And how will they look at it in our country? Yes, and in yours, and the international community. Not by washing, so by rolling the incorporation of a country into another country.

It is useless to blackmail us, to try to bend us over, to kneel on our chest. You are probably convinced of this. We are not rich people, and we will not become richer if we go to the breaking point. Therefore, think about this integration, it should be in the name of unification, unity of our peoples. It must be a conscious step and a conscious choice. No behind-the-scenes shenanigans. I just can't go to them. Everything must be honest and open.

Who in the EAEU is not a member of the WTO? Only Belarus. Only. We agreed: this is our Customs Union, we are together, we will get together and live together. And then together, if necessary, we will join the WTO. But you broke your promise and joined the WTO. You publicly promised not to do it. Kazakhstan followed, because, well, you understand that subsoil, resources, they are beneficial to the West, they accepted. Armenia and Kyrgyzstan have long been in the WTO. And we stayed. And now we are on the verge of joining, and here they are, members of the government, I told them: I forbid joining the WTO without my knowledge. We need to figure out where we're going to go. We are already ready, they have already put a collar on us and are dragging us there. Now it's easier for me. And suddenly Donald comes to power. And he put an end to this WTO, and at the G20 they said that the WTO needs to be reformatted, it needs to be redone. I say to mine: so what? Who turned out to be right?

This does not mean that we will not join some trade organization, but we need to figure it out today.

There is no need to reproach us that we are trading in weapons with Azerbaijan. The Polonez missile system, when we put it into service, we invited Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Russians for testing - and they tested it in densely populated Belarus. And everyone saw: a rocket fell four meters from the target. Four meters is a precision weapon. Azerbaijanis: "Sell." And we need to repay the loan, the Chinese gave us a loan for this. I then suggested: okay, I'm selling the complex to you. And I tell the Armenians (I knew that there would be a problem) - I am ready to supply you with a similar complex. The Armenians refused, citing the fact that they have a Russian Iskander. Azerbaijan, I’m already revealing a secret, asked: make us a Polonaise for the next parade. Here the Armenians showed the Russian complex at the parade, they are approximately the same, but a little more powerful, ours flies up to 300 kilometers, and that one for 300. And we did it before the parade. This is probably my fault that I tried to make this complex for the parade, but I suggested it to you too, you said: no need.

We have a normal attitude towards both Armenians and Azerbaijanis.

I don't want the old people to die in the Donbass... Should we, the Slavs, fight here? We are the same people. And I know Ukrainians. They are not enemies, they are not as bad as we sometimes say.

... I will tell you my position today: everyone is afraid that NATO will be there. I recently told Vladimir Vladimirovich (Putin): listen, you and I will soon ask the Lord to have NATO there, and not frostbitten with a gun. Here's what we can bring. If there are thugs standing there, okay with a gun, they will be given rockets. Doesn't it surprise you that at this moment NATO and the US are pulling out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty? Now imagine for a moment, I will have missiles with nuclear warheads near Gomel, and you will have them near Rostov. What is it? Is that what we want? Therefore, before it's too late, you need to take your head in your hands and not shout with hubbub, but do something to stop it. So let's take steps in that direction. There is no need to blame Lukashenka.

At one time, I sounded openly, I was already ready, like a border guard, to stand on that border, if necessary, I say: “Well, given that Russian people treat me normally, Russians and Ukrainians, and elections should be held there under the Minsk agreement ". And what do you think? Those who need to stop this war, especially Poroshenko and the Ukrainians, first of all, they themselves began to reject it. The Russians answered exactly the same. Well, why should I climb on the rampage if they do not want it? But I am in favor of us, the three Slavic states, solving this problem.

We need to keep our heads on our shoulders and think that it is better for us, that we will leave the children. We must not leave this conflict to children. How Armenians and Azerbaijanis cannot leave the Karabakh conflict to children. We brewed it, we must sort it out, and the children should not suffer later without us.

Let's not talk about the current "thugs" in Poland, in Ukraine, you can't call them otherwise, those who destroy monuments. Especially the Poles - 600 thousand people we put Soviet soldiers there, freeing Poland! Today, you see, the monuments interfere with them. And when I see jackhammers, when they tear off our commander's head, this is complete idiocy. These are complete "thugs" who are at war with monuments!

We, too, were preparing for this, but the presidential elections interfered. My first was a decisive decision - a ban on the renaming of streets and the demolition of monuments. Therefore, we still have the Partizansky district in the capital, and the Soviet and Moscow districts of the capital. They were subject to renaming: Gogol Street is there, and Pushkin Street, and Lenin Street are very close by. We have kept all this and even the monument to Lenin. We are not ashamed of this, in front of the Government House - on the most important square - Independence Square - this monument stands. We had such a leader. Turns out they were bad leaders. But they were.

It was, this is our history. So take your time. It is necessary to comprehensively evaluate and not demolish the monuments to these people. Let them stand. Our grandchildren, great-grandchildren will come and ask: who was that? At least they will look on the Internet about this person something.

For us, remember, sacred is sovereignty. I already spoke about it. Well, that relative independence. I believe that there are no absolutely independent states. And we are also not so independent, but sovereign. If they want us, as your Zhirinovsky suggested, to divide us into regions and shove us into Russia, this will never happen. And if in Russia they think in such categories, it is to the detriment of Russia itself.

Now I feel a big threat, for example, not to sovereignty, to my country, and I feel it from the south. When the weapon poured out. This is a problem for me, a danger. So I quickly build a border in the south.

- We held a referendum on the death penalty when the question arose. Under 90 percent - for the preservation of the death penalty, and I did not participate in it. I didn't state my position. The population has voted, and it will be the same in Russia, and maybe even 99 percent will vote for the death penalty.

The French, the British, I talked to them, they say: “Now, if we put this issue to a referendum, the population would speak unambiguously, at least 2/3 are for the death penalty. Especially given what's going on." I say: "So you see, you are acting against the will of the population." And now they are used to saying, talking, that this is not a question for the people. And I think for the people. No matter how I thought, we had a referendum. I can't abolish the death penalty.

I do not see an ideal future for Belarus. Even the Russian president will not be able to see the ideal future of Russia, and Russia has huge opportunities. You know, because perfect doesn't exist, doesn't exist at all, even in the empire of the United States of America - what's perfect there? See what's going on. A lot of problems. Therefore, there is no perfect. Since the world is developing, secondly, we cannot see this ideal, and for Belarus, which is at the crossroads of all paths, we have never had an ideal, if you look at history. And it won't, and Russia won't. Because Russia's mission is great.

You know, I always keep it simple. The main thing is not to live in a war. We don't need war. Neither you nor us. This is how we fought. And we will do everything else ourselves, if we don’t do it, we will buy it.

The union state was built in order to demonstrate the depth of integration. In the EAEU, we have not achieved the integration that we have here. You look, military-political, even a military bloc. There is no such thing in the CSTO. Our area of ​​responsibility here is the western direction. A plan has been developed in case of aggravation of relations with NATO or, God forbid, conflict or war. The essence of what is, it is also no longer a secret, we are the first to enter the war. Within literally up to a month there, all the armies that are located up to Moscow - in Russia, of course, there are not many of them, because our area of ​​\u200b\u200bresponsibility - they are mobilized and connected to protect the Belarusian direction. This is not the case in the CSTO. This is not the case with other states. We have a very deep integration up to the military.

True, they spoiled it all with this base. Nobody needs a base. Listen, build some kind of base on the old airfield. We discussed this problem with Putin. I ask the question: why? Three minutes of approaching aircraft from Russia. Why drag an airfield to the front line, if a war starts here ... I say, please, we have three or four air force bases. Land 10, 20, 30 planes on any base tomorrow. Enjoy. But as soon as I asked Putin when we had the World Cup: give me a link of fighters, well, just in case. He sent me. Our guys, together with the Russians, flew on these Russian planes.

Then they took those planes. We still have a lot of disputes here, you know. I say: listen, well, we are an outpost in this direction. Give me ten planes. Oh, it's expensive there and stuff. I say: are you hinting what I should buy for money? I don't have that kind of money. I have to pay for gas, repay loans ...

We have two very important Russian bases. Zero rubles, zero kopecks are paid. And everywhere you pay for bases. Here the term of the contract ends in 2019-2020, I don’t even raise the question of payment. It is somehow even inconvenient - asking the Russians for money for these bases. The general function is performed. True, this is for nuclear forces. When the agreement on the nuclear cover of Belarus ended, I say: it is necessary to conclude an agreement, a nuclear umbrella. Do you think the Russians made an agreement with us? Ask some experts here. This is our union and friendship. I don't want to go deep anymore.

We have a great factory. We will restore any aircraft. Throw who can still fly. And we will restore what is needed there. Asked, asked - did not give. I got angry, 10 aircraft were restored in two years, MIG-29 and Su. To not bow.

The most important issue is the economic issue, which we must resolve, this is the issue of tax maneuver. So that it does not happen that Lukashenka, as some oppositionists howled in our country, handed over Belarus for a barrel of oil. If the Union State project is to be developed, as it is fashionable to say, it must be done with dignity. Maybe, I will say pathetically, only in the interests of Belarusians and Russians. And no one else. Everything personal should be put aside.

We have nothing to share. We did not live in the same state for nothing. And for many years, and for many centuries, not only in the Soviet state. And in no case can this common be lost. On this we stand and will stand.

Inc. corr. FGC according to http://www.president.gov.by/

If you notice a mistake in the text, highlight it and press Ctrl+Enter to send the information to the editor.

Vitaly Rymashevsky Photo: belsat.eu

Vitaly Rymashevsky, a Belarusian political and public figure, co-chairman of the Belarusian Christian Democracy party, spoke in an interview with Apostrophe about how Putin will help keep power in Russia for a long time, what are the maximum and minimum tasks for the Kremlin, where they are.

Given the new round of Russia's claims to Belarus, the desire for "closer integration", backed up by the threat of losing oil discounts for Belarus - how can all this be explained?

Of course, the level of confrontation has reached a new level, if we compare the level of Belarusian-Russian relations over the past 15 years. These are new demands from the Russian Federation regarding the surrender of Belarusian independence. There were clear demands, insulting for the Belarusians and the Belarusian government, to surrender sovereignty. First, it was said in the form of "closer integration and a unified customs service."

Although it should be noted that these demands are put forward in accordance with those treacherous things that were written in the plans for building the Union State of the Russian Federation and Belarus 20 years ago (the agreement on the Union State of 1999 - "Apostrophe").

Secondly, Russia has made it clear that it will not subsidize the Belarusian economy with cheap energy. This is a serious new challenge for the sovereignty of Belarus. The Russians have publicly stated their clear and tough position at all levels. Briefly described, it sounds like this: money in exchange for independence.

- What is Lukashenka's weak point, why can Moscow make such proposals to him?

The most serious mistake was made by him at the very beginning of his reign. He came to power under the slogans of the reanimation of the USSR and even sought to become the leader of the reanimated Union. It was Lukashenka who lobbied for this idea, he had high ratings in the Russian Federation, when compared with Boris Yeltsin. Lukashenka lobbied for the idea of ​​integration with the Russian Federation. This made Belarus a hostage to Russia in economic, political and military terms. For the first 15 years of his reign, Lukashenka tried to systematically implement this plan: the importance of the Belarusian language, national culture was systematically reduced, pro-Russian agents were introduced into law enforcement agencies - even if ethnic Belarusians, then with pro-Russian views. So it was along the ideological vertical: the West was presented as a threat.

Let me remind you that in Belarus there are ideologists at every state enterprise, at the university and the army as political officers. Through them the idea of ​​an alliance with Russia and a united people was carried out. The undermining of economic independence is associated with fatal mistakes: tying the Belarusian economy to the Russian market, cheap energy and the lack of reforms that would allow the Belarusian economy to be more competitive in the modern world, and therefore more independent of any state.

These are the main mistakes. In the last 5 years, he understood this. His chances of seizing power in Russia are reduced to zero, where the authorities are tightly controlled by the FSB, power structures controlled by Putin. Lukashenka understands that he can either be simply destroyed within the framework of a large state, or made a small vassal. Therefore, the policy in Belarus gradually began to change: they talk a lot about the diversification of the economy, there are indulgences in the sphere of the Belarusian language, promotion of national culture.

But time has passed. After 20 years of destruction, when the number of children who study in the Belarusian language has decreased several times, today it is somewhere between 1-1.5 percent of children in the whole of Belarus. This is the result of Lukashenka's long policy, and now we have to pay for it.

Photo: EPA/UPG

- What is the Kremlin's interest in "closer integration" of Belarus into Russia?

The economic situation in Russia is not the best and there are no prerequisites for improvement. Therefore, Belarus will be used to strengthen the image of Putin as a "collector of Russian lands." In this context, there is both the occupation of Crimea and the public challenge of the United States. The actual annexation of Belarus would cement this image of a "gatherer" for Putin. For the Russian public, this would be presented as another victory for Russia. This is a huge plus for the current government of the Russian Federation against the background of the economic crisis and the impoverishment of the population.

The integration of Belarus is an important element of domestic Russian policy. Their maximum task is the annexation of Belarus, the minimum task is the deployment of Russian military bases on the territory of Belarus.

What does the deployment of Russian military bases on the territory of Belarus mean and why does Lukashenka refuse this? Everyone understands that the Russians will not leave these bases, just as they were not going to leave Sevastopol. These bases will become springboards for the next stage - the annexation of Belarus.

There was once information in Ukraine that Putin was imposing some Ukrainian security officials on Yanukovych. To what extent are the Belarusian security forces already today controlled by Lukashenka, and not by Moscow?

The Russians do not tell Lukashenka who he should appoint to positions. At least, such information has not leaked anywhere yet. Although, of course, many leaders of law enforcement agencies come from the Russian Federation, were born in Russia, many built their careers there. It so traditionally happened that Lukashenka did not put Belarusians in the highest power positions in the KGB or the army. Therefore, the Kremlin was already satisfied with such a personnel policy by Lukashenka.

I am sure that there is an indirect influence of the Russian special services, they operate quite freely in Belarus. They can, for example, kidnap citizens of Ukraine with complete impunity. An example known to the whole world (, - "Apostrophe"). Another example of the work of all special services is the exposure of foreign intelligence agents. During the entire rule of Lukashenko, not a single agent of the FSB or the GRU of the Russian Federation was exposed. But this does not mean that they are not here - it means that the Belarusian law enforcement agencies are not professional and there is significant control by the special services of the Russian Federation through their agents of influence.

If you look at the military, they are trained in Russian military academies. Recently, this dependence has decreased, but many mistakes have been made in 20 years. And why go far for examples when our main military school for young military men still bears the name of Suvorov. Let me explain: for the Belarusian lands, Suvorov is an occupier, a murderer and a conqueror. There, cadets are taught on the example of Suvorov, who suppressed uprisings against the Russian Empire on the territory of our country.

How does the Belarusian society react to the threats that are being talked about now, and what moods does sociology show?

Sociology has not changed for 20 years, the vast majority of Belarusians are in favor of independence. About 15 percent are in favor of unification with Russia. Unlike Ukraine, there is no difference by region - here we are a more unified country. Therefore, Belarusians, of course, are for independence. People are used to living in their own country, a new generation has grown up. Less and less nostalgic for the USSR. The Belarusian language is becoming more popular not in everyday life, but among young people as a value. Also, there is no negative attitude towards the Belarusian national culture among young people and the majority of the population. This has practically disappeared everywhere, with the exception of certain odious individuals, agents of Russian influence among non-governmental organizations or clerics of the Russian Orthodox Church in Belarus. But I would not say that the opinion of these people has any influence on the Belarusian society.

Photo: EPA/UPG

- How will this round of conflict end, given the fact that elections will be held in Belarus in 2020?

The Kremlin has well chosen the time for the confrontation. The parliamentary campaign in Belarus will be at the end of 2019, and at the beginning of 2020 - the presidential one. It is difficult to call it an election, because the result is totally falsified. But I think, and this opinion is widespread among democratic-minded people in Belarus, that depriving Russia of economic subsidies is a big plus.

It was the needle of cheap oil that hindered the reform of the economy, allowed an inefficient economic model to exist, subsidize unprofitable collective farms and enterprises. All this needs to be reformed long ago, to make our economy competitive. Therefore, we call for economic reforms.The authorities will be forced to give more freedom to private business, remove the level of state corruption, which hinders the development of both business and society. Lukashenka has every opportunity to follow this scenario, he has a vertical of power that provides him with election fraud and local government, law enforcement agencies. He controls the power in the country, so this system can withstand the shock of impoverishment of the population, but if there are quick reforms.

There is a second scenario. Lukashenka is not interested in surrendering the independence of Belarus, as this threatens him and his family, so he can bargain with the Russian Federation, he will try to chat up the problem: meetings with Putin, the creation of working groups, and so on. Lukashenka, as a cunning player, will try to negotiate, beat out maximum preferences for himself.

But now the mood in the Kremlin is different, as the situation in Russia has changed. They need the dependence of Belarus to maintain Putin's rating. They need another win. As this victory, they consider the annexation of Belarus. Therefore, I am afraid that by getting involved in this bargaining, agreeing to even more serious integration, Lukashenka may make a very serious mistake. Moscow this time will not let go so easily.

Found an error - highlight and click Ctrl+Enter