What impact could tougher action against Belarus have?
The EU has agreed to ramp up sanctions against Belarus, following the forced landing of a plane flying over its territory. It has urged EU-based airlines to avoid Belarusian airspace and called for a ban on Belarusian airlines flying over EU territory. The EU is considering further sanctions against specific people connected to the regime and against the country’s financial sector and important industries.
What could be the impact of flight restrictions over Belarus?
The call by EU leaders not to fly over Belarus has already been heeded by a number of European airlines.
Around 3,300 flights flew over Belarus last week, according to aircraft tracking website Flightradar24, with 660 of those actually landing in the country.
Belarus receives income from airlines that enter its airspace of up to €70,000 (£60,000) each day, according to John Grant from the aviation analytics firm OAG.
Losing this amount of money, he says, would be “an inconvenience” but would not have a significant impact on the economy of Belarus.
Instead of flying over Belarus, airlines have the option of using Lithuanian or Latvian airspace for example, without adding too much time to a flight so the extra fuel costs incurred would not be great.
Maps showing flight paths show some airlines are now diverting to avoid Belarus.
On 27 and 28 May, Russia, a key ally of Belarus, denied entry to its airspace to two European airlines because they planned to avoid flying over Belarus to get to Moscow.
What other measures is the EU considering?
EU foreign minsters have reportedly discussed sanctions on companies which are close to the Belarusian regime.
They include Belaruskali, a state-owned company which produces potash – a potassium-rich salt used in fertilizer.
Sanctions on financial transactions and targeting the country’s oil, wood and cement industry have also been considered.
The new sanctions regime could be finalised by 21 June, when EU foreign ministers meet in Luxembourg.
What sanctions against Belarus are already in place?
The EU first introduced restrictive measures against Belarus in 2004, following the disappearance of two opposition politicians, a journalist and a businessman several years earlier. These included an arms embargo and a ban on “the export of goods linked to internal repression”.
The EU imposed more sanctions against Belarus on 1 October 2020, in response to the “brutality of the Belarusian authorities and in support of the democratic rights of the Belarusian people”.
These restrictions – a travel ban and asset freeze against individuals associated with the government of Alexander Lukashenko – have since been expanded to include 88 individuals and seven organisations.
Those on the list are forbidden from entering or transiting through EU territories and their assets in the EU are frozen. In addition, EU citizens and companies are forbidden from making funds available to any individual and company on the list.
Do other countries have sanctions against Belarus?
The UK mirrors current EU sanctions.
Foreign affairs select committee chairman Tom Tugendhat has called for economic sanctions against Belarus including the closing of the Yamal gas pipeline. This runs from Siberia in Russia, through Belarus and Poland to Germany.
The US also imposed travel restrictions and targeted financial sanctions on nine state-owned entities and 16 individuals, including President Lukashenko. First imposed in 2006, these were tightened in 2008.
In 2015, after President Lukashenko released six political prisoners, Washington suspended sanctions on state-owned companies and in 2019 the two countries announced they would exchange ambassadors.
However, in October 2020, following the 9 August presidential election and subsequent crackdown on opposition protests, the US expanded the sanctions to include 24 people.
On 27 May, the G7 group of wealthy nations – Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United States and Britain – issued a statement calling for “accountability for the actions of the Belarusian authorities” and threatening “further sanctions as appropriate”. www.bbc.com/news/