 Thank you so much. Welcome, everyone. I'm really glad that you joined me this afternoon. And I would like to start my presentation on Belarus with a quote from the last statement at the trial of the opposition candidate, Vladimir Nikolayev. Here is the quote. When the interrogation finished and we could have more or less human-like conversation with my investigation officer, he told me a story about his youngest son. His son goes to the kindergarten. While walking home, the father asks a usual question. What is interesting things have you done today? We learned to speak English, says his son, bouncing. Oh, really, amazes the father. So what words have you learned? Thank you. Thank you and goodbye in Belarusian. He replies a Belarusian boy to his Belarusian father. The investigation officer of the State Security Committee, KGB, Colonial of Justice, thought he told a really funny story and pondered over it for a while when I asked, do you have any idea what you have just told me? Here is a short quote, and I will start my presentation. The December 19th events have proved to be a shock therapy for some of those who have been either fatigued or reluctant to Belarus issue. Europlas dictator Lukashenko retained the presidency of Belarus and in the night after the election, by using brutal violence and massive arrests, showed to the world that he had no intentions to lose in situation in the country. Lukashenko's irony after the election night events was more than shocking. During the interview for the Washington Post, Lukashenko said, if it were to happen again tomorrow, I would do the same thing I did at that time. Or we told you clearly that there is no less democracy in Belarus than there is in the United States. How come that today in the 21st century in the middle of Europe, almost next to our doors, we have the dictator who is cynical enough to announce that he would be happy to release all political prisoners? But not because he acknowledged his mistakes, but because it's too expensive for the state to keep them in prison. Before analyzing what had happened in Minsk on 19 December and talking on the current day's economic crackdown in Belarus, I would like to touch several points. Pre-conditions, which are usually identified as one of the main reasons why Belarus is ruled by the dictator already for almost 20 years. This is a question of identity or non-identity. Some scientists think that the most dangerous feature of communist countries is nationalism and ethnic policy, but Belarus' case is specific. Although nationalism and patriotism were the key force in defeating the totalitarian Soviet empire, in Belarus they were weak and rudimentary. The lack of national ideas now identified as one of the reasons why Alexander Lukashenko came to power. It is no secret that Belarus has taken the leading position in the Soviet Union on a number of economic indicators. It was also the leader in the spheres of Russification and development of Homo Sovieticus. The prototype of a Soviet man is still being created by banning national symbols, reconstructing historical facts, and marginalizing the Belarusian language. Finally, the national ideology became a matter of concern, and its mission was to provide the governing regime with additional legitimacy and return to the last socialist illusion, illusions that were destroyed during the years of Perestroika to the people of Belarus. According to Robert Nisbet, the community is the fusion of thinking and feeling, tradition and commitments, membership and will. Despite the fact that the Belarusian society is quite homogeneous, the sense of community is not explicitly expressed. Even during the Tsarist times, the Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians were named the same Russians. One of the essential elements of ethnicity, the language, both in the Soviet times and during Lukashenko's rule, has been consistently suppressed. Thus, the uniqueness of the Belarusian language has not become the basis for community. This is illustrated by the act that even the president of Belarus mocked the Belarusian language and said that English and Russian are the only great languages in the world. Another factor of no less importance, historical memory, also testifies the great affection of the Soviet rather than independent past. It is clear that the idea of an independent state does not exist in the historical memory of Belarusians, not to mention a very brief period in the beginning of the interwar years. And for the majority of Belarusian people, the past of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is not very important. Many Belarusians become svelte with greater pride while recalling the Soviet past to be more precise the victory over Nazi Germany. It is not secret that major disaster unite people and Belarus had been in the front line for a long time, was devastated and lost one-third of its population. What is more, the discourse of the country of the Second World War heroes is constantly explored in the Belarusian society. This neither the history nor the language are essential elements of the Belarusian community. The independent thought has been suppressed since the years of Stalin when the greater part of creative intelligentsia was destroyed. The deconstruction of identity and the lack of unifying idea were very favorable actors for the totalitarian regime aiming at atomizing the society as much as possible. In Belarus, it is possible to talk about the negative identity. The Belarusians are aware of what they are not, but do not fully understand what they are. Labour Force, another factor I would like to touch before going into nowadays is fear in the society. Labour Force is insparable from the so-called framework contracts. The system regime regulates that the state has to renew the contract of employment with its officials. In practice, it means that the regime may simply terminate the contract if, for example, specific citizens are not obedient enough to the regime. Similar rules apply to the students. Dillingen ones are removed from the universities, lose the opportunity to acquire higher education and find a better job in the future. This situation indicates that in the state where status in the society is determined by the opposition of punishment and rewards, then by the system of qualification and competence, motivating elements are fear and obedience, not innovations and initiative. It is no wonder that people are passive, indecisive and ruled by distrust. They prefer the system to resistance. In other words, Belarusians are quite practical and rational. A bird in hand is better than two in the bush. It is much better to have something that system can give, especially as in the current situation, many do not see any alternatives. The fundamental obstacle of social change is the weakness of community that gives space for the authorities' development. Due to alienation, mistrust and suspicion and fear for changes in status, loss of job or place of study, repression, as well as the absence of additional motivation, the Belarusians themselves are unable to initiate social change. And what is more, try to avoid them. Society is more inclined to adapt to the current situation and belief in fostering the vision of stability rather than to take a radical change without clear alternatives and guarantees. In the case of Belarus, in order to move the stagnation of society, it is necessary to work with the idea of community, which may affect the motivation of the Belarusians and reduce the tendencies of alienation. On the other hand, it is necessary to develop a clear alternative that would offset the conformist and fear of change. These are fundamental presumptions for social change. And the last point here is control of access to information. Today, the system functioning in Belarus effectively restricts the resident's access to information, alternative to state-run Belarusian press and television. The access to the internet is expensive in Belarus. Moreover, the state provider separately charges for access to domestic and foreign IP addresses. The latest respectively significantly more expensive. State-controlled pricing policy allows for effective limitation of the search for information online. The internet is rarely used to get information, browse, and search for the latest news. Usually, the resident's use of internet is limited to virtual communication and entertainment. Only 38% of adult Belarusian population uses the internet. Just 15% use it on a daily basis. The most active group of internet consumers is about 40% of all internet users is residents of 18 to 24 years of age. Almost 70% of the internet users live in cities. Not only the control of digital space enhances the propaganda possibilities, but it also allows more effective control over civil society. The most active internet users are socially active Belarusians. In Belarus, civic activities are mostly concentrated in the digital space. Internet news, portals, various media platforms, and personal blogs are not only a way to get alternative information in Belarus, they also serve as socializing factors, encouraging participation in civic social initiatives. The internet has become the central location, uniting the Belarusian opposition and civil society. As Lukashenko regime severely restricts civic space offline, formation of civic society debates and information exchange take place in cyberspace. The 2010 presidential election campaign also partly relocated its activities from real space to virtual. What was general situation in Belarus before the presidential elections? The 2010 presidential elections of Belarus were much more dynamic to compare with those that took place in 2006. The Belarusian Democrats hailed the results of the opinion poll, which demonstrated that the approval rating of Lukashenko has plummeted down. Yet in September, various sociological studies indicated that the approval rating of the current president of Belarus swung between 33 to 47%. Although Lukashenko was endorsed by at least one third of the electorate, in theory it did not guarantee an undisputed victory during the first election round. Namely, this naive and purely mechanical calculation was the main source of hope for the Belarusian opposition. Such a prospect has become even more welcomed due to Russia's position towards Belarus that had been more extreme than usually. Traditional disputes over the prices and tariffs of gas and other energy resources, recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and the issues of the customs union were supplemented by the active information confrontation. Russia's NTV television produced three films that revealed some facts from Lukashenko's political biography previously unknown to the public. In its turn, official Minsk also did not hesitate to make any comments about Moscow and even arrange an interview with Georgian president Mikhail Sakashvili. The greater part of opposition and international political players observed such changes in the relations of long-standing allies from two different angles. As a possibility of political change in Belarus, based on the assumption that without Moscow's support Lukashenko's position is extremely vulnerable, the members of more radical opposition even hoped that Russia could refuse to recognize the results of the presidential elections. And as a geopolitical threat, as intensifying Russian rhetorics may only be an introduction in order to discredit and replace Lukashenko with a more favorable and submissive protégé of the Kremlin. Both positions developed a similar election scenario, but assessed it differently. However, both of them were false and misleading as they missed several important aspects, analysis of inconsistent EU policy, Belarus dependence on Russia and understanding of domestic political situation in the country. The EU's position towards Belarus has not been consistent. The thought in the relations between Minsk and the EU, noticeable since 2008, has intensified with the approaching presidential elections and parallel to the mounting tension in Russian-Belorussian relation. In such a context, a certain dilemma occurred. Efforts to cooperate with Minsk meant concessions, or at least apathy, in the affairs of democracy, rule of law, and human rights. In 2010, Russia demonstrated aggressive position towards Belarus and such behavior forced some EU member countries led by Lithuanian president to take over Lukashenko's rhetoric and claim that it is the president of Belarus who guarantees the country's stability. The members of the United Civil Party of Belarus, the largest opposition party, and experts said directly that the aim of the policies of some European countries has turned to saving Lukashenko from the Kremlin. During their visit to Minsk, German and Polish foreign ministers, Westerwelle and Sikorsky, argued that the EU is to accept the elections and even provide financial assistance to Belarus, provided that the elections are free and transparent. Thus, not only Brussels, but also individual EU member states lacked a consistent position. The majority of Lithuanians, Lithuanian foreign policy developers, believe that sincerity of Minsk-Moscow, believed the sincerity of Minsk-Moscow's information war. However, some experts have argued this alleged conflict should have ended just before the presidential elections in Belarus and has been merely Russia's additional tool to press Lukashenko. Russia's influence on Belarus is inevitable. Therefore, any reflections on the ways to outsmart Russia are only illusions. Moreover, any concerns about Russia's intentions to overthrow Lukashenko should answer at least two questions. Firstly, how useful could it be for the Moscow? Secondly, is there any better alternative? Several arguments could be found in order to answer the first question. However, most of them, for example, such as personal insults by Russian president or prime minister tended to be more of emotional nature. Meanwhile, the second question was very pragmatic and typical of any authoritarian regime. In such countries, there are usually no clear alternatives. What was the domestic political situation before the elections? Political split has always been the main problem of Belarus' opposition. However, in 2006, Alexander Milinkiewicz bowed to the pressure of political will and international community and became the unanimous presidential candidate for the democratic forces. Contrary to 2002-2006 election, this time opposition did not have a single candidate. Until mid-2010, Milinkiewicz was undoubtedly the best opposition politician. Milinkiewicz, who discredited himself after the square events, the demonstration held against the outcome of the presidential election in 2006, having failed to consolidate the existing support of Democrats, announced that he had no intentions to participate in the presidential elections early in the election campaign. In total, 16 candidates have expressed their willingness to participate in the 2010 presidential election. 11 of them, including Lukashenko, submitted 11 of them and Lukashenko submitted the required amount of signatures to the election commission. The opposition itself admitted that only Vladimir Nikolayev, Andrei Sainikov, and Yaroslav Romantchuk have been able to collect the required amount of signatures. To register all candidates, even those who failed to collect the required amount of signatures, was a conscious government policy, as a large number of candidates creates the impression of the democratic and transparent election process. On the other hand, this strategy was aimed at splitting up the lukewarm support of the opposition and encouraging internal competition. The Trump chip of Russia was thrown in as well in order to sharpen the internal competition. All the mentioned main opposition candidates, Nikolayev, Sainikov, and Romantchuk, have been accused and linked to the Kremlin's money and influencing public in one form or another. The narrative about Moscow's frontman in Belarus is not a new one. In 2006, the same could be heard about Aleksandr Kozulin, previous presidential candidate. Later, he was jailed for a few years. Although neither specific facts nor evidence existed, the discourse of Russia's frontman has become popular among many Western commentators and politicians. Despite the fact that gaining the support of so-called opposition-getter, or it's about 20% of the population, is quite a great challenge to any of these politicians. Nikolayev was regarded as the second most prominent candidate after Lukashenko. The leader of the civic campaign Tell the Truth that later evolved into a political one clearly had the most generous budget of all opposition candidates. Nikolayev's team has repeatedly called other opposition candidates to withdraw from the election race. Money that was put into the election campaign without greater accountability forced many to believe that Nikolayev has been a Russian project. Others were against the business plan-based model of the Tell the Truth, as a matter of principle. For yet others, particularly to the completely unknown politicians, the ultimate goal was to become official candidate in the presidential elections. In this context, even Nikolayev, who carried out the most active election campaign, performed the function of splitting the opposition. When the election marathon gave the momentum, Nikolayev disclosed an agreement with another opposition candidate, Sainikov, but it was the only and quite delayed achievement in attempting to unite the opposition forces. Sainikov is the former minister of foreign affairs of Belarus and long-time head of the most prominent independent Belarusian website Charter 97. His work experience in the ministry contacts in the Belarusian bureaucracy apparatus, as well as good contacts both in Russia and the US, at least on the theoretical level, suggested that Sainikov would be the best pragmatic candidate. However, as the election race began, no one seriously regarded him as an opponent to Lukashenko. However, in addition, it was argued that Sainikov's election team simply did not have enough money for sustained electoral campaign. Thus the tandem of Nikolayev and Sainikov was a logical consequence. Roman Chuuk has long been known as an independent expert and economist and was one of the leaders of the United Civil Party. The election campaign of the economist with liberal views was based on the slogan million new jobs in Belarus. Roman Chuuk's program could be called the most consistent constructive alternative for the current regime. Most of the candidates have been fulfilling their own personal tasks, slightly increased their presence in public, participated in live debates on national television and just added a record in the curriculum candidate for the presidential elections. Their function was simply to create a proper quasi-democratic background for the elections and imitate their dynamics. To sum up, the abundance of candidates and manipulations with Russia's influence on the opposition candidates were typical means of the divide and conquer principle actively exploited by the Belarusian government. None of the opposition candidates was capable of challenging Lukashenko in such circumstances, huge administrative resources of the official means, minimal possibilities of the Democrats to access to mass media, peculiarities of forming electoral commissions. In the situation described, the only threat to Lukashenko regime was a massive protest, or as the Belarusians themselves said, the square. Unlike 2006, when Milinkiewicz's election team was totally unprepared for massive protests, even a month before the elections, and practically had not considered the possibility of the mass meeting at all, last year almost everyone was talking about the square. The opposition had only one condition. If there was no second round of the presidential elections, it would be assumed that the elections were falsified, and people would be invited to defend their choice in the streets. On 2006 election night, 20,000 people, the majority was the youth, spontaneously gathered in the center of Minsk. In contrast to the previous election, last year the role of youth organizations and initiative was barely visible. Nevertheless, the optimist hoped for a massive protest and the skeptics expected that just a few thousand people will go into the street. Election day 19th of December passed quietly, in the sense that there were no signs that Belarus authorities are preparing provocations and severe attacks over their citizens. In the evening, more than 40,000 people gathered in the streets of Minsk for peaceful protests. No one of them expected so harsh violence. Hundreds of people, almost all opposition candidates were arrested and thrown in KGB jail that night. There are different opinions what provoked such brutality of the regime. Some experts say that Lukashenko got scared of his people. That election results showed that he's losing control over this country. Others, that all commands were given without Lukashenko's knowledge or that international community symbol misinterpreted pre-election maneuvers of the regime. Relatively soft pre-election situation was taken as a commitment to move in the direction of basic democratic principles. Just after the election, it seemed that the regime was willing to erase any signs of pre-election looseness. Part of the party leaders were in jail. Seeds of mistrust were sowed in the opposition political parties. As some leaders, opposition leaders, publicly accused colleagues from opposition as initiating riots. Though almost everyone agreed that most probably these persons were blackmailed, internal opposition political party situation was far from being consolidated and adjusted to new reality. Political parties are still discussing shifts in organizational structures, changes of the leaders, initiating internal discussions of political party coalitions. The constant failures with the political leadership and opposition mark one thing. The perception that we are dealing with political parties is wrong. There is no political opposition in Belarus. We have to admit that that we mostly are dealing with dissidents. And it should be taken into account before any planning and decisions having the upcoming parliamentary elections in Belarus. Grassroots civil society organizations and active citizens in Belarus were usually taken over by political agenda because of the available resources for campaigning. And therefore the civil society representatives were usually adapting to the political cycle of the country. Relatively relaxed situation before the elections has resulted in some kind of awakening in civil society. Number of those willing to engage into public activities increased and soft voices of beliefs in upcoming changes started to rise. However, the repressions after the 19th of December have severely endangered the fragile civil society. The repressions of the regime now are targeting even those activists who had not been active for several years. Reaction of international community just after the election night was timely and joint solidarity was expressed. The question is if the good will would produce real outcomes. The main concern is whether there is enough political will regarding the unified long-term perspective on Belarus. It is worth to think maybe this situation could become a momentum even for renovation of the transatlantic community. And now all the latest events in Belarus about the economic downturn in the country. For many years Lukashenko remained popular in Belarus because of economic stability. Some experts passed several years of Belarus economic development named as a unique or even successful economic model or sometimes even economic miracle. However, latest economic developments in the country are of no surprise for those who carefully follow political processes in Belarus. It is not a secret that the swing of Belarus economics and social policy depends on a political cycle. It has already became a common thing that before the election Belarus authorities increased pensions and salaries so trying to avoid any disorders in the society. After the election authorities usually tighten the belts and external forces were always to blame. This year's scenario is very similar though in a very ungrateful situation because of the significantly decreased support from Russia. For many years Lukashenko was balancing the country's economy by reselling Russian oil and gas. In such a luxurious situation official Minsk flourished until 2007. After 2007 Belarus economy was being stabilized due to external loans and the last five years national debt increased by five times. In 2010 Kremlin changed its rhetoric towards Lukashenko. Aggressive politics and hard rhetoric surprised not only Lukashenko. International community even started the discussions where the Russia was interested in changing leader of Belarus. Such situation increased expectations in the European Union that due to hard position of Russia Lukashenko might be interested in considering to start gradual democratization processes in the country. Leaders of Poland and Germany even have promised three billion euros if presidential election in Belarus would be democratic. Russia's pressure on Lukashenko is of no surprise for international expert community. Belarus leader is famous for his capacity to maneuver between east and west. So he has never been a safe partner for either Russia or the EU. Nevertheless as I already mentioned before change of Russia's tactics was not aimed to overthrow Lukashenko. Russia's pressure was directed towards privatization processes in Belarus. Russia by different tactical maneuvers was trying to accelerate privatization of large Belarus enterprises. This in turn would increase Belarus dependence on Moscow. If Moscow takes over strategic industrial enterprises Lukashenko will have little space for maneuvering. And finally this would result in the loss of power over the country. However I could not agree with the expert for a casting for Belarus Tunisian scenario already announcing collapse of the regime. Lukashenko has a huge arsenal of different instruments for controlling the situation. First of all Russia will never let Belarus to bankrupt. In return for the credits Minsk step by step will dispose some Belarus enterprises like mobile telecommunication company, giant of motor industry and others. But only part of Belarus railways or post could also be considered as object of negotiations. On a privatization shelves Lukashenko has many more objects that are of Russian interest. Following calculations of different experts Lukashenko's privatization package amount up to 50 billion dollars. Recently it was announced that Lukashenko is selling Belarus Kali, the fourth largest potash producer globally. The reported price of Belarus Kali is 30 billion euro, yes euros. In parallel Belarus is requesting a new economic rescue loan at the International Monetary Fund. Belarus Prime Minister said the government has asked for IMF loan between three and eight billion dollars for the next three to five years. Belarus last received loan of three and a half billion for 2009 and 2010 when the global financial crisis was starting its Soviet style economy. This week Lukashenko will be also given 800 million dollars and another 2.2 billion will follow over the next three years by the Eurasian Economic Community a post-Soviet integration block nominated by Russia. The most important requirement of the loan is the privatization of state-owned assets of Belarus, which are worth 7.5 billion dollars. This year's devaluation of Belarusian currency was the largest in the world for the 20 past years according to the World Bank. Independent media already called the day of official devaluation the Black Tuesday. The National Bank of Belarus officially exchanged rate against the dollar by 36% in May. However, it is still impossible to freely convert Belarusian rubles into foreign currency because very few are willing to sell. Unable to buy foreign currency Belarusians are now trying to get rid of their rubles by buying consumer goods such as refrigerators, furniture and furniture and other goods. That helps Belarusian producers but lawyers the values of the Belarusian currency even further. I would like to conclude my presentation by quoting one of our experts and he says that Belarus does not have a problem because it has Lukashenko but it has Lukashenko because of its problems. Thank you very much.