The irregularities were expected in the Sunday presidential election in Belarus. According to the preliminary conclusions offered by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Belarus election did not meet the OSCE commitments and international election standards.

President Alexander Lukashenko, according to official statistics, won 82.6 per cent of the vote, and the next best was Alexander Milinkevich wining only 6 per cent of the vote.

This says nothing in terms of whether he is a legitimate leader quite obviously he is not but it does point to the real differences between Ukraine and Georgia on the one hand and Belarus on the other.

Unlike in Georgia and Ukraine where the opposition actually won the vote but through the manipulation of the vote counts was denied a government role, in Belarus the margin of difference between the opposition and the president is much wider. The comparatively low numbers of protesters that showed up on the streets of Minsk in the last days also point to a real difference between the three models.

The one thing Lukashenko has going for him is an impressive economic growth rate which in 2005 was close to 7.6 per cent. This makes Belarus much more like Kazakhstan than Ukraine.

At the same time, official unemployment is low (close to 2 per cent) and the GDP per capita is close to $7,700 (2005 estimates). This is close to the GDP of Romania, an EU member to be, and higher than the GDP per capita of Ukraine and Georgia.

Experience with democracy in Central Asia seems to suggest that regime change is unlikely (or at least more difficult) in countries where the electorate feels a degree of economic dynamism and prosperity.

The Central Asian authoritarian leaders have all perfected the technique of keeping themselves in power by economic empowerment of the select few who then serve as a cover for the regime by offering an illusion of progress to come.

But the Belarusian economy is deeply flawed. An economic crisis will weaken the incumbent president, which is also the right time to press for democratic change from the outside. The EU should be ready for this.

The situation is a delicate one, particularly for the EU and Russia, the two neighbours of Belarus, and the US. The US has been outright critical of the election and the Americans have been putting enormous pressure on Lukashenko ever since US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pronounced him to be the last European dictator.

The position of Russian President Vladimir Putin is particularly difficult at the moment given that Russian is heading the G8 Group this year. Any open embrace of Belarus could have serious negative effects on the way the G8 responds to Russia's other interests namely in the energy field.

In many ways, outspoken and confrontational Lukansheko has become a liability for Russia, which has a genuine interest in close cooperation with the West. If Lukashenko's firebrand political style starts costing Kremlin energy deals with the EU and becomes a real rift in the Russia-US relationship, Putin will probably not object to dropping him in exchange for a more moderate political leader.

There are three things the EU can now do in order to support and promote the democratic development in Belarus. The effort of bringing democracy to Belarus will be a process that will require a systematic and concrete plan of action and time.

Analysis

First, the analysis has to be right. Belarus in 2006 is not what Ukraine was in 2005. However, Milinkevic is a real opposition force to the present political option and he seems to wield widespread support amongst the young. The EU should support political empowerment programme for the youth by also giving political cover and resources to Milinkevic and helping him build the opposition block.

Second, the EU and the US should ask Putin to walk away from Lukashenko and stop artificially supporting the Belarusian economy through favourable import/export agreements. The Belarusian president is giving Moscow little in terms of strategic clout, while costing the Russians a great deal in terms of squandered political capital.

Third, the EU and the US should work to isolate Lukashenko and his collaborators politically and economically. The EU has already discussed applying targeted sanctions. It is now time to deliver on this novel idea.

In Belarus, stability and prosperity will come only with the departure of the dictator. To get to that point, a systematic and applied pressure will be needed. Having Russia on board will make things easier and the processing time of regime change shorter.

Borut Grgic is the director of the Institute for Strategic Studies, Ljubljana.