WASHINGTON/BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The United States, Britain and Canada may impose sanctions on Belarus as early as Friday, four sources told Reuters, and the European Union told President Alexander Lukashenko it did not recognise him as the country’s legitimate leader.
Diplomatic pressure on Lukashenko mounted a day after he had himself sworn in for a sixth term at an inauguration ceremony that was kept secret until after it was completed.
British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said that following the “fraudulent” inauguration, British, U.S. and Canadian officials were working on sanctions against those responsible for “serious human rights violations”.
Read more ....
More News On The EU And The U.S. Refusing To Recognise Alexander Lukashenko As Belarus President
Belarus: Lukashenko's new mandate lacks democratic legitimacy, EU says -- BBC
The EU says Lukashenko is not the legitimate Belarus president -- CNN
U.S. no longer recognizes Lukashenko as legitimate president of Belarus -- Axios
Ukraine doesn’t recognize Lukashenko as legitimate president of Belarus -- Kyiv Post
U.S., UK, Canada sanctions on Belarusians may come Friday, sources say -- CNBC/Reuters
U.S., U.K., Canada May Soon Announce Sanctions On Belarusian Officials: Report -- RFE
UK preparing human rights sanctions against Belarus -- Al Jazeera
4 comments:
Didn't he win the election? Perhaps he cheated. Has evidence been provided to support such a claim?
Sanctions are act of war. Before declaring war on a country and/or it's leaders evidence needs to be supplied. Furthermore such a poorly thought out position will likeky only Further serve to exacerbate Cold War 2. It's one thing if the EU wants to do this. America is in a very precarious position. We need to think very prudently about this. Frankly our government doing stupid in terms of foreign policy and bringing massive blowback on us concerns me far more than COVID-19.
Has evidence been provided to support such a claim?
Do spy agencies usually provide evidence and thereby compromise their elint, agents and in general compromise their methods and assets.
A cop going undercover at some point has to testify in court to get a conviction. It is not so with secret agents. If we treated espionage work like police undercover work, we would soon not have a spy service and would be speaking another language. How is the weather in la la land? A sunny 86!
Anon (4:35),
You raise an interesting point. If we assume the Intel is trustworthy, we assume Congress whose job is to declare war has thoroughly reviewed it, and we assume Congress is trustworthy, then maybe so. Unfortunately neither the elected officials nor the Intel Services have proven trustworthy. In fact, there's substantial evidence to suggest US Intel is NOT trustworthy.
If we're going to declare war on someone as well as exacerbate Cold War 2, we need to see the proof. Yo express another way, if you're going to further endanger the lives of ny loved ones with such mechanatuons, I think it reasonable to ask for proof and barring such oroif being presented the action simply cannot be supported.
Perhaps we should be treating Intel more like a law enforcement operation. Numerous Americans have died and been maimed for life in fruitless military operations that not only didn't advance our interests but actually undermined them. Perhaps this could have been avoided if people asked questions and didn't blindly trust the government.
"How is the weather in la la land? I could ask you the same question? Blindly trusting people who have either repeatedly mislead us and are oftrn grossly incompetent seems most unwise. So, where is the evidence to support the claim? Don't hide behind the excuses of sources, methods, agents, and assets being compromised. Much of the problem could probably be solved if we adopted a foreign policy more like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, or Switzerland.
This is probably a mistake. While the US's sympathies are with the protesters, and we don't want to undermine them; the fact is that Lukashenka has kept Belarus independent from Moscow. We - and the protesters - don't want Lukashenka turning to Putin to keep him in power which will only erode Belarusian independence.
There should be some alternate ways and alternate language how we can express support for the protesters without directly harming Lukashenko in a way that would force him to go to Putin.
US and Europe should be looking to keep multiple options available to them right now, not closing them off.
CHris
Post a Comment