On evening 1st May the American news agencies delivered sensational information saying that the Department of State had announced its decision of final closing down the embassy in Minsk and had required that Belarus close down its embassy in Washington and consulate in New York. However, at about 1 a.m. the spokesperson for State Department Tom Casey stated that “the US has reconsidered temporarily the decision of closing Byelorussian embassy in Washington and consulate in New York”. 

The crisis of Belarus-USA relations got sharp on 7 March when the US had enlarged the sanctions against Byelorussian oil-processing plants and stated the sanctions would be withdrawn only after releasing the political prisoner Alexander Kozulin. On same day, Belarus recalled its ambassador from Washington. 12 March the US ambassador Karen Stewart had to leave Minsk as it was demanded by the local foreign ministry. After that Minsk deported 17 American diplomats. 30 April, Jonathan Moor, charge d’affaires of the US in Belarus, was summoned to the foreign ministry and handed a list of 10 American diplomats announced to be persona non grata by Belarus. Those ten were to leave the country within 72 hours. People for the list were chosen randomly, it was no personal matter. Byelorussian foreign ministry “allowed” 5 employees to stay in the US embassy.    

So, Byelorussian leadership made an obvious provocation for breaking any diplomatic relations. Why did the State Department revisit “temporarily” its own decision just after a few hours? Explanation is simple: there are two opposing streams among the decision-taking officials dealing with Belarus. The first group considers it that if Belarus is the last dictatorship in Europe (that’s the definition by Condoleezza Rice), then it must be treated accordingly. The second group believes that Belarus is a Russia’s problem and so the US should not interfere there so that not to spoil relations with the Russian leadership. The advocates of the former point of view are concentrated in the State Department. The supporters of the latter point work in the Security Council. So after the first group managed to lobby the initial decision, the second group immediately suspended it.