Thank you for your questions.
Belarus is predominantly a centrally planned economy, with 80% of all assets belonging to the state. You are absolutely right to say that it's a miniature of the Soviet Union. We have a central planning body that plans all of the economy. We have a president who appoints even the manager of a small plant. We have a situation of total price controls.
At the same time, the regime was lucky to get a huge amount of support from Russia. It amounted to about 15% or 20% of GDP. It's a unique situation, unheard of in any part of the world, when a foreign country subsidizes its neighbour in this volume. Of course, it wasn't about friendship; it was all about the imperial ambitions of Russia.
Lukashenko didn't want to have a merger. He wanted to be the president of a new, revived Soviet Union. When his plan failed and Putin took over in Russia, he decided to make the best use of Russian resources and sold Russia political futures. Russia bought them, but right now Russia is fed up. It is cutting subsidies.
Now, in 2010, the subsidy amounts to about 7% of GDP and will continue to fall. Belarus has failed to deliver a customs union and Russia now sees that the only strategy is to put on more pressure via economic tools and mechanisms, meaning to raise gas prices. But again, even the west cannot complain here, because Belarus buys gas at a price that is three times lower than the price for Germany, let's say. That was a kind of subsidy. Belarus is highly dependent on the Russian market and Russian energy.
Lukashenko, even using IMF money, has failed to diversify the economy and start market reforms. That is why we, as the people who are taking part in the presidential elections, are seriously concerned about the sustainability of the Belarusian model. We want the Canadian government, the Canadian Parliament, to support us right now and then to provide us support once we get into power.
With this kind of heritage, it will be extremely difficult to carry out reforms, and we definitely want to avoid a Ukrainian scenario, where, after the elections in 2004, the Ukrainian government did not deliver on the promises to the people. We want our reforms to be a success, not just to be there to redistribute wealth.