Increase of authorized capital of JSC "Belinvestbank"
The government of Belarus has decided to increase the authorized capital of JSC "Belinvestbank" at 10 million, because it preserves hope for a profitable privatization in 2012. But the high price (over $ 1 billion) does this proposal unattractive to investors.
The government of Belarus has decided to increase the authorized capital of JSC"Belinvestbank" at 85 billion rubles ($ 10 million) due to the remnants of the national budget.
In contrast to the Belarusbank and Belagroprombank, which authorized funds have been increased by $ 1.7 billion at current exchange rates due to emission sources, recapitalization of Belinvestbank is conducted by the expense of real money. One reason for the increased government focus on "Belinvestbank" is its desire to privatize profitable (previously several well-known European banks expressed such a desire). However, due to persistence of the country authorities in maintaining a high price for this controversial asset, the privatization of the bank did not take place neither in 2010 nor in 2011, although the governing body of the National Bank of Belarus has repeatedly spoken of a high availability transaction of purchase and sale of the bank.
Over the past year, military-political relations between Minsk and Kyiv have become complicated. Due to their high inertia and peculiarities, this downward trend would be extremely difficult to overcome.
The root cause of the crisis is the absence of a common political agenda in the Belarusian-Ukrainian relations. Minsk is looking for a market for Belarusian exports in Ukraine and offers its services as a negotiation platform for the settlement of the Russo-Ukrainian war, thereby hoping to avoid political issues in the dialogue with Kiev. Meanwhile, Ukraine is hoping for political support from Minsk in the confrontation with Moscow. In addition, Ukraine’s integration with NATO presupposes her common position with the Alliance in relation to Belarus. The NATO leadership regards the Belarusian Armed Forces as an integral part of the Russian military machine in the western strategic front (the Baltic states and Poland). In addition, the ongoing military reform in Ukraine envisages a reduction in the number of generals and the domestic political struggle makes some Ukrainian top military leaders targets in politically motivated attacks.
Hence, the criticism of Belarus coming from Ukrainian military leadership is dictated primarily by internal and external political considerations, as well as by the need to protect the interests of generals, and only then by facts.
For instance, initially, the Ukrainian military leadership made statements about 100,000 Russian servicemen allegedly taking part in the Russo-Belarusian military drill West-2017. Then the exercises were labelled quazi-open and military observers from Ukraine refused to provide their assessment, which caused a negative reaction in Minsk. Further, without citing specific facts, it was stated that Russia was building up its military presence in Belarus.
Apparently, the Belarusian and Ukrainian Defence Ministries have entangled in a confrontational spiral (on the level of rhetoric). Moreover, only a small part of the overly hidden process has been disclosed. That said, third states are very likely to take advantage of the situation (or have already done so). This is not only about Russia.
The Belarusian Defence Ministry officials are restrained in assessing their Ukrainian counterparts. However, such a restraint is not enough. Current military-political relations between Belarus and Ukraine are unlikely to stabilise without the intervention of both presidents.