Posted on November 15, 2008 - by Venik
Russian Missiles: the Minsk Option
A number of times over the past months and even years various Russian government officials mentioned a possibility of a ballistic missile deployment in Belarus. The independent-minded Lukashenko kept Putin at an arm’s length, while managing to achieve a seemingly impossible task: to annoy Moscow, Brussels, and Washington all at the same time. Lately, however, things have not been going well for Belarus. Despite its isolationist, Soviet-style economy, the global credit crunch meant that Belarus may not be able to come up with cash to pay for Russian gas. Lukashenko needed a loan – a big one – and turning to Moscow was the only option.
Russia agreed to extend a $2 bln loan to Belarus. Half of this amount will be disbursed by the end of the year and the rest – in 2009. Belarus will use much of these funds to pay for Russian gas. Another interesting development is that gas trade between Russia and Belarus (including Russian gas and Belarusian transit charges) will be done in rubles and not in dollars as before. I briefly mentioned this possibility over a month ago. This is not a major development yet, but it is a big step toward the ultimate goal of Russia’s foreign trade politics – selling oil, gas and other natural resources in rubles at the planned commodities exchange in St. Petersburg.
Map: Russia, Belarus, Poland Lithuania
Recently, when Medvedev mentioned the possibility of a missile deployment in Kaliningrad, I was surprised that Belarus was not included in his statement. Looking at the , you can clearly see that deploying “Iskander” launchers in Belarus would be quicker and easier for Russia than deploying the missiles in… Russia, in Kaliningrad (that little enclave peeking out on the left side of the map above). Sure, Lukashenko can always say “nyet” to the Kremlin, as he did so many times before. Still, I thought there was something strange about Medvedev not mentioning Belarus as an option.
Over a year ago, Belarusian Missiles and Artillery Forces commander Gen. Mikhail Puzikov told reporters that “Iskander” missiles will be deployed in the country in 2015-2020. He even mentioned such details as which unit will operate the missiles: the 465th Missile Brigade based near Asipovichy, Mogilev region. Belarus actually wants the new “Iskander” missiles to replace the older “Tochka” models it has in service. But Lukashenko is being coy about this: on the one hand he wants the missiles, but, on the other, he wants certain economic concessions from Russia having to do with gas, trade deficit, value-added taxes, etc.
Today, however, the Wall Street Journal quoted Lukashenko as saying that Russia proposed to base its ballistic missiles in Belarus. This is not a new proposal: the discussions have been ongoing for some time and Lukashenko, simply put, is dragging his feet. When Medvedev mentioned a possible missile deployment to Kaliningrad and did not mention Belarus, Lukashenko got excited. He said that if the deployment deal falls through, Belarus may be seeking to just buy the “Iskanders”. Easier said than done: those suckers are expensive and Belarusian economy is not doing all that well at the moment.
So why does Belarus need Russian missiles to be based on its territory? Lukashenko’s relations with the West are poor enough that he doesn’t need to worry about how Russian missiles will affect his country’s image in the eyes of the EU or the US. Just as Poland milked the US for every dollar in exchange for hosting the ABM interceptors and Belarus is attempting to squeeze every last ruble it can from the Kremlin. I can’t blame Lukashenko: if Belarus is to place itself in the middle of the Russo-American missile tug of war, it might as well get something out of it for itself.
Belarusian army is in desperate need of modernization, but it can hardly afford even to keep things running as they are. Belarus is doing what it can to keep its Soviet-era weapons in operational condition (and doing a much better job at it than Russia did), but it can’t afford to buy modern systems in any significant quantity. If Russia places its ballistic missiles in Belarus, this would almost certainly mean a large-scale upgrade of Belarusian air defenses. So the country’s army will get at least that out of Moscow’s squabble with Washington over the ABM shield.
Plus there is added security for Belarus, which, named by Bush “the last dictatorship in Europe”, still considers itself a potential candidate for NATO’s democracy-though-bombing policy a la Yugoslavia. Shortly after NATO’s “Operation Allied Force” against the Serbs, many in Belarus firmly believed that American bombers could appear over their country at any moment. The possibility of NATO bombing a country where Russian troops and ballistic missiles are stationed is mostly theoretical.
In 2007 Russia already gave Belarus a $1.5-billion credit for fifteen years. Recently Belarus requested a $2 bln load from the IMF but did not get it. And so Russia stepped it once again to bail out its closest – even if at times not the most cooperative – ally with the $2 bln loan. For years, Russia and Belarus – technically members of a Union State – have been arguing about a range of economic issues, most notably about common currency and VAT. Russia’s $2 bln loan came with strings attached: now Belarus must pay for gas in rubles. This means that the country must maintain considerable reserves of Russia’s currency and the value of this reserve will depend on the stability of the Russian ruble. Some see this as a sign that Belarus is moving closer to accepting Russian common currency condition for the Union State.
Regardless of how the gas-for-rubles scheme plays out, Russia seems to keep its options open in regard to the US ABM shield deployment. Russian Foreign Ministry officials have clearly stated that Medvedev’s threat to deploy missiles in Kaliningrad would only materialize if the US pushes along with the planned ABM deployment. With the US economy going down the drain, the new White House has bigger fish to fry at the moment and does not need the Russian drama. Initially, Obama will play for time and will probably try to avoid making any commitments, which seems to be his signature style.
I don’t think he will put on hold the entire ABM project to avoid the appearance of appeasing the Kremlin, even though, personally, Obama (along with much of the US scientific community not feeding from the defense budget) is very skeptical about the practical capabilities of the shield. He is equally unlikely to completely ignore Russia’s position and to continue the full scope of the ABM project. And so a half-measure should be expected from the new US administration: something that neither Russia nor hardliners back home will like too much.
Russia promised not to deploy missiles in Kaliningrad if the US drops the ABM project. But even if the US takes just half-a-step to appease the Russians, this would make it very difficult for the Kremlin to follow through with its original threat. And so Russia is preparing a half-measure of its own: a missile deployment in Belarus. It may not be Kaliningrad, but Belarus still shares a border with Poland (as well as one small but equally vocal EU member that likes to pee in Putin’s morning coffee – Lithuania). This will allow Medvedev to show that he means business, while at the same time keeping the door open for future negotiations with the Americans.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts
Related posts:
- Belarus-Russia rift widens as Minsk snubs Moscow meet (Reuters via Yahoo! News)
- Belarus-Russia rift widens as Minsk snubs Moscow meet (Reuters) (Yahoo!7 World News)
- Belarus-Russia rift widens, Minsk snubs Moscow meet (Reuters via Yahoo! News)
- Belarus-Russia rift widens, Minsk snubs Moscow meet (Reuters via Yahoo! UK & Ireland News)
- The Makings of a Successful Foreign Policy
