Surprising article. I have come to expect a more insightful analysis coming out of RT. As it stands, the analysis is surprisingly devoid of the dynamics of European and Eurasian changing relationships. Here is an example: "While building up the Customs Union with Russia (and Kazakhstan) Lukashenko is desperately looking for the way to “diversify” his country’s economy – that is, to make it less dependent on Russia. Up to now, the only perspective of European integration perceived as realistic (and simultaneously unacceptable) in Minsk was inseparably connected with deindustrialization and other “shocking” procedures well-known in Eastern Europe. Lack of opportunities for entering European economic space with undamaged heavy industry has been the major obstacle for Belarus-EU rapprochement. If agreements with Italy and Finmeccanica proposed transferring Italian technologies and modernizing Belorussian industry, they might remove that problem and boost Lukashenko’s European policy." First, the Customs Union is a union between Belarus, Russia and Kazakhstan, no parenthesis. It is implied here that deindustrialization is a benign process imposed by EU for the benefit of the Eastern Europe. And consequently, the author puts "shocking" in quotes, indicating that this is something good that hits Eastern Europe! Amazing. Eastern Europe is in penury, having destroyed its own industry, and having to accept foreign production outfits, colonial style. And to insure that there are public services, they are in debt beyond repair. Italy and Turkey are forging new alliances with Russia, clearly visible from energy deals, and other economic maneuvers. Belarus has done well. It still has nearly 100 employment, exports food, and is successful with heavy industry. IMF loan has nothing to do with the finances; it was Lukashenko's ploy to start privatizing large, non-strategic industries, under the guise of IMF requirements to stifle opposition.