Brief History of Previous US-Belarus Relations (Research Paper Sample)

Previous Relations of US-Belarus and current US-Belarus Trade and Commercial Activities
Name
Institution
Date
Previous Relations of US-Belarus and current US-Belarus Trade and Commercial Activities
Part A: Brief History of Previous US-Belarus Relations
The international relations between the United States and Belarus began in 1991 following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Belarus was previously a part of the Soviet Union. Primarily, the US sole focus in Belarus was democratic reforms. The US recognized independence of Belarus on December 25, 1991 (Global Security, 2015). The two states further established diplomatic international relations followed by the opening of the US embassy in Minsk on January 31, 1992. There have been notable historical events that blurred the interrelation between US and Belarus. For instance, three air hot air balloons taking part in the Coupe Gordon Bennett race used the Belarus air space (Woehrel, 2013). The US had informed Belarusian authorities of the intended race, but the Belarusian authorities shot one air balloon that killed two American citizens. Other two air balloons were forced to land and occupants fined for lack of visa.
Much of the historical friction between the two countries has been caused by lack of democracy. The Lukashenka regime in November 1996 conducted a very flawed referendum that caused the dissolution of Belarus parliament, further centralizing power in the executive. With these events, the US announced in 1997 its ambition to involve in a "selective engagement" policy with Belarusian top authorities. In essence, the US downgraded government-to-government relations with Belarus to a level of an assistant secretary. Besides, the US restricted government’s assistance to Belarus and restriction of educational exchange programs in some instances. The official bilateral relations between the US and Belarus have since remained at a low level. Even more, the US Congress in 2004 passed the Belarus Democracy Act (Andrew, 2015). Primarily, the Act allows assistance for opposition parties, civil rights, and NGOs in Belarus. In fact, an official statement by then US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice listed Burma, Cuba, Zimbabwe, and Belarus as "outposts of tyranny”, and countries where the US should promote democracy.
Part B: Current US-Belarus Trade and Commercial Activities
In most cases, a diplomatic relation is followed by a strong economic, humanitarian, and political ties between countries involved (Harris, 2000). In essence, the US and Belarus sought to engage one another in more than just diplomatic issues. Economic activities and trade are at the fore front in this association. However, the present state of affairs between the two countries leaves a lot to be desired. As mentioned, the US has implemented the idea of selective engagement with Belarus since 1997, and economic issues between the two countries has been no different. It should be noted that the US primary aim in engaging with Belarus was to foresee democratic reforms. Failure to achieve this led to several US economic sanctions on Belarus. In particular, the US implemented extreme economic sanctions in 2007/2008 against the chemistry and oil businesses of Belneftekhim (Andrew, 2015). The result was that Belarus reconsidered its bilateral relations with the US and removed its ambassador from Washington DC.
In August 2011, a statement from the US Department of States website declared new economic sanctions against Belarus. The US imposed new economic sanctions against four main state-owned businesses in Belarus. The businesses were Grodno Azot that manufactures fertilizers, the Belshina tire factory, and a fiber manufacturer called Grodno Khimvolokno, and an oil refinery called Naftan. The primary reason was that the Belneftekhim conglomerate owned and operated the four business entities (U.S. Dpt. Of State, 2011). The Belneftekhim entity in itself had been blacklisted under the Executive Order 13405.
It must be noted that sanctions were caused by continued political imprisonment and lack of democracy and freedom from the owners of these business entities. The US is a country that stands for and symbolizes democracy, thereby fights for the same in every capacity. The sanction means that products of these enterprises cannot sell in the United States (Daase, et al. 2014). International trade between the two countries suffers the consequences of these sanctions. In a normal interstate relation, there is a free flow of goods and services between countries, which is hardly the case between the US and Belarus.
Nonetheless, a statement from Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website (MFARB) notes that it has never been the interest of Belarus to deteriorate its relations with the United States. Instead, Belarus sole interest is to normalize relations. The statement further asserts that Belarus only allows for bilateral ties when mutual partnership and respect is a guarantee. Belarus has blamed the US for interfering with its internal activities (MFARB, 2015). The main cause of international friction has always been when states feel that a super power involves a lot in its internal activities. It is even interesting to note that states accept financial aids but stand firm when others question their use of democracy and humanitarian values.
Again, it is worthy to note that economic relations and trade between the US and Belarus have successfully developed until recently. The primary reason is the existence of notable differences in the governmental sphere. The United States ranked between fifth and sixth among Belarus’ trade partners for several years. The bilateral trade turnover further reached an all-time high of $740.8 in 2007 (MFARB, 2015). However, the economic sanctions on the Belneftekhim marked the end of flow of several imports into the United States. There have been damaging economic effects on the Belarusian economy. In essence, a country suffers an economic meltdown when one of its reliable trade partners quits corporation (Jackson & Sorensen, 2012). It must be noted that the US also exported goods to Belarus but the economic effects on the US cannot be as severe as that felt in Belarus. Besides, the US has many international trade partners as well as a good local consumers’ market.
The sanction policy had a major turning point in 2011 with the inclusion of the four previously mentioned enterprises. Efforts to revive the bilateral trade between the US and Belarus took shape in 2010-2011. Total exports of Belarus in 2011 reached $86.1 million with significant growth in the volume of bilateral trade turnover to $642.7 million (MFARB, 2015). Presently, Belarus exports different products to the US, which include glass fiber, oil products, woodworking articles, flax fibers, furniture, optical products, and foodstuffs among other products. Below is a graphical representation of the foreign trade between the US and Belarus
The graph shows fluctuations in exports and imports between the US and Belarus over the years. As of 2011, Belarus had more imports from the US than exports. In fact, the US exported more than it imports from Belarus from 2007 (MFARB, 2015). It can be argued that economic sanctions applied by the US affects Belarusian exports but not the US exports. Further, it is interesting to note that Belarus imports from the US but exports far less than its exports. A balanced bilateral trade exists when two countries have mutual trade benefits from one another. In essence, trade and economic activities between the US and Belarus remains arguably stable despite the political friction between them. The graph below further shows the amount of US foreign investment in Belarus over the years
The graph depicts that the total amount of foreign investment by the US in Belarus nearly doubled in 2011 compared to 2012. However, investment in the Belarusian economy has fluctuated significantly over the years, with the $137.8 million being a record high (MFARB, 2015). Despite the sour diplomatic relations between Belarus and the US, the latter remains one of the largest investors in Belarus. For instance, the number of foreign enterprises and joint ventures in Belarus with American capital totaled 282 as of 2012. Many American companies have shown increased interest in doing business with Belarus. Notable companies that have invested in Belarus include Navistar, ArvinMeritor, Siguler Guff, Microsoft, Honeywell, and Cisco System, among others (MFARB, 2015). Most notably, Microsoft opened a Belarusian representative office in 2010.
The continued cooperation with charitable American organizations is also worth mentioning. In particular, organizations that provide Chernobyl-related help continue to cooperate with Belarus. The US became one of the leading donor countries in 2011 as far as Belarusian economy is concerned. The total of US charity donor as of 2012 was $15.1 million (MFARB, 2015). Moreover, these charitable organizations provided medical treatment and recuperation for 1100-1200 Belarusian children every year. However, the US suspended the majority of these programs in 2009 following the need to have an intergovernmental treaty between the two countries. The interesting aspect of international relations is that countries are willing to engage with one another only when treaties exist (MFARB, 2015).
The slight increase in trade activities between the US and Belarus is the result of several political and diplomatic decisions by the US. On January 3, 2012, President Barack Obama signed the Belarus Democracy and Human Rights Act of 2011 into law. The act expanded and strengthened the initial Belarus Democracy Act of 2004, as well as the Democracy Reauthorization Act of 2006 (IBP, Inc. 2014). In essence, the US called for new parliamentary and presidential elections in accordance with the OSCE...