Stanford Politics

O

n August 9th, 2020, it was announced that Alexander Lukashenko, the president of Belarus, had won his re-election bid. The results came as no surprise, considering the man known as “Europe’s last dictator” has been in power since 1994. This year, however, the election results were disputed on a scale larger than ever before, escalating into what is now Belarusian’s biggest defiance of the Lukashenko regime in decades. 

Though official results claimed that Svetlana Tikhanovskaya – the opposition candidate – had won about 10% of the vote, she claimed that her real vote share was closer to sixty or seventy percent. Tikhanovskaya had entered the race after her husband – the original candidate for president – was jailed and had his bid for office rejected. 

The opposition grew wary of election tampering after the systemic silencing of Lukashenko’s challengers. There were no independent observers invited to monitor the election and an internet blackout began after the election that lasted for several days. When Lukashenko announced his overwhelming victory, protestors went out to the streets to dispute the results. As of December 2020, the Belarusians are on their fourth month of protests.

Nick Kaeshko, a Belarusian who was present at the protests, describes the scenes of solidarity. “In most cases, it was extremely peaceful, energetic and uplifting. But there were a couple of rallies that have been brutal due to police efforts to distribute the crowd. I have never seen a single object being thrown at the police or any brutality from the side of the protestors. The violence was always coming from the riot police, and that’s what I was afraid of – being arrested and tortured in the prison.” 

Despite the thousands of Belarusians that have been arrested and jailed since the start of the protests, the people of Belarus have yet to be deterred in their fight for freedom and against the Lukashenko regime and continue to fight for their future every day. 

“We have graffiti on the wall in one of the city districts – it says ‘where to call when the police is the one who is beating you?’ – and that’s how we feel,” described Kaeshko. 

***

The current protests are demanding far more than political and policy change; they are demanding a resurgence of Belgian culture and national identity that has been long suppressed under Russian control and influence. For decades, Lukashenko has been complicit in the erasure of the Belarusian culture. 

“Belarusians are regaining their sense of national identity, which was suppressed by Lukashenko. For a long time, the Belarusian language was forbidden. Belarusian historical culture didn’t have similar opportunities to Russian culture, or Lukashenko-created Soviet-style ideology. And so at these protests, although no one instructed Belarusians to do so, they themselves brought out the red and white flags that they had kept in their homes. It’s very inspiring, because the flags are ‘unregistered symbolics,’ and you could get in trouble with the police for having it, but we were all just quietly hiding them in our homes and spontaneously brought them out at the protests. This national identity goes back much longer than Lukashenko’s rule,” explains Katsiaryna Shmatsina, a Belarusian political analyst at the Belarusian Institute for Strategic Studies.

This suppression of Belarusian national identity and culture stem back all the way to 1995, when Belarus and Russia first started to strengthen ties and flirt with integration.

“At that time, Lukashenko had actual aspirations to become the leader of Russia. This now sounds very funny, but at the time, there was a chance. He knew Yeltsin would seek out someone to step into his position in Moscow, and before Putin came to the picture, Lukashenko actually thought he might be the leader of Russia,” says Katsiaryna.

Lukashenko demonstrated his loyalty to Russia by restoring the Soviet-era symbolics, creating Russian schools, and promoting Russian culture. He created a society which placed Russian culture at its core, with Belarusian language deteriorating and many Belarusian schools closing. 

“They changed the history books with all these pro-Russian or pro-Soviet sentiments, without so much of a role for actual Belarusian history. And so, Belarusian culture developed, in many dimensions, underground,” says Katsiaryna.

With the Belarusian language closely associated with the opposition movement and considered taboo in public settings, Belarusians were confined to using their language in the comfort of their homes or in safe spaces they created for themselves in order to escape the overwhelming Russianization of the country. Belarusians learned to live in this underground community. At informal gatherings amongst friends and families, independent art galleries where forbidden speakers and thinkers would lecture, Polish publishing houses where Belarusians had to smuggle their literature to get published, Belarusians kept the spirit of their nation and cultural traditions alive. Now, for the first time, they are coming out in droves with the ‘forbidden symbolics’ that they had been stashing for so long.

“I think that it’s only now that we have started to have a national identity, not the one imposed by state propaganda, but one that most of the Belarusians can relate to,” explains Kaeshko. 

The Sovietization strategy imposed by the regime decades ago seems to be wearing off, especially for the younger generation. “[The new generation] do not have Soviet nostalgia, they have access to alternative information – not just state propaganda – and many of them have already had a chance to live, study, or work abroad,” explains Alla Leukavets, Belarusian policy analyst at the Center for Strategic and Foreign Policy Studies. Lukashenko has been holding on to a mindset that many young Belarusians feel isolated from; they do not relate to the Soviet symbols and Soviet patriotism that the regime has tried to keep alive. For them, it’s time for a change, and it’s time for Belarusian leadership to represent the interests and culture of Belarusians.

THE RUSSIAN REACTION

The fight for cultural sovereignty and political representation is not only dependent on Lukashenko’s survival; it also depends on the Russian government’s moves in the political chess game to come, and Russia’s power over Belarusian politics is immense. 

“In case Russia stops supporting the Belarusian regime financially, Lukashenko will run out of resources to sustain the repressive apparatus,” says Leukavets. This will lead “to his entourage resigning and choosing a new leader. Regardless of the scenario, one of the key roles in the process of regime change in Belarus is currently played by Russia. As long as the Kremlin keeps supporting the regime in Belarus, the success of the democratic revolution will be delayed.”

Although he has so far stood behind the legitimacy of the Lukashenko administration, Putin’s support for the regime will only last as long as the relationship is in Russia’s best interest. 

“On the one hand, the post-election crisis in Belarus has provided the Kremlin with a strong bargaining advantage vis-à-vis Minsk. This is a ripe moment to put pressure on the Lukashenko regime to deepen economic and political integration within the Union State by creating supranational organs and introducing common currency. The Kremlin could also be considering dismissing Lukashenko completely and replacing him with a new leader who will pursue a pro-Russia course,” Leukavets continues.

Putin also must ensure that revolutionary fire does not spread to Moscow. If Putin chooses to support Lukashenko’s removal from power, it will show the West that Putin is willing to support democratic measures and be a Western ally. However, Putin continues to destabilize the region by waging war in Ukraine and has almost single-handedly funded Belarus for the decades it was shunned from the Western world. Regardless of whether he chooses to jump ship, Putin was a critical enabler of Lukashenko’s success.

“Putin is afraid of the spillover effect of the protest. Lukashenko is now in a corner. In a crisis, Putin can essentially ask for anything. So there is legitimate concern about scenarios such as Russian annexation, because we’re in a weak position right now,” says Shmatsina.

Putin was quick to take advantage of Ukraine’s destabilization in 2014. His troops illegally seized the Crimean peninsula in southern Ukraine, and six years later, the territory has yet to be returned. In 2008, Putin sent troops into Georgia to annex territories there. Having avoided sufficient punishment for his ventures into Georgia and Ukraine, Belarus is at risk of being the next country incorporated into Putin’s Russian empire. 

Shmatsina isn’t kept up at night by this possibility. “I won’t disregard this option, but I don’t think that’s the first one on the table,” says Katsiaryna. “I would learn towards a more moderate scenario, where Putin gets rid of Lukashenko at one point or another. With so much unrest boiling inside Belarus, it’s unclear even if he stays in power or for how much longer he would last. It’s good to change him out now, when Putin can have a say in it.”

While Lukashenko’s Belarus has always had a good and close relationship with Putin’s Russia, their personal relationship has not been so affectionate. “Putin and Lukashenko are not friends,” Shmatsina explains. “They talk about brotherhood and et cetera, but they can barely stand each other.” 

As of now, the protests in Belarus have been very specifically targeted against Lukashenko; Russia’s influence is not yet threatened. Despite Russia “counter-funding” Belarus while Lukashenko was facing EU sanctions, “the EU has never sanctioned imports of Russian energy from Belarus,” explains Leukavets. Yet, with the increased international pressure the protests have attracted, it may become harder for the Kremlin’s funding to stay under the radar of the Western watchdogs. 

Unlike during the Ukrainian Maidan protests, the protestors are not asking to cut off ties with Russia. Russia has been able to maintain its positive relationship with the Belarusian people. A military intervention, however, would almost certainly turn public opinion against the Kremlin, something that Putin would not want to risk. Putin will instead keep a close eye on the way that the transfer of leadership is handled. 

“The public opinion polls say we want to have equally good relations with the East and the West. We don’t want to be a part of a union state, but we want to have good relations [with Russia.]Putin wouldn’t mind seeing new leadership in Belarus, but for him, it would be important to see the transition of power based on constitutional reform — not to set the precedent that the protest itself won. Because this would set a bad example for his own people, the population who is unhappy with his role,” says Shmatsina. 

With Putin’s latest constitutional amendment, it is likely he will be able to surpass Lukashenko’s infamous 26-year reign and assume the title of the longest European dictator alive. While protests and opposition in Russia have been tightly suppressed, there certainly is opposition to Putin, and the Russian people are risking their lives to speak out. As in Ukraine, and now in Belarus, the Russians are watching the protests closely in their brother nations and taking note. If Belarus were to successfully enstate a democratic government free of Russian influence, the Russian people might be emboldened to seek their own revolution and leave Putin behind as a corrupt character in the history books. 

A NEW BELARUS ON THE HORIZON

If the protesters succeed in ousting Lukashenko, there will be no guarantee of a Belarusian cultural renaissance; as long as Russia is interested in controlling the region, Belarus’ fate is unclear. However, the people of Belarus retain a hope that they can regain power over their language, their government, and their culture. 

“I’m very proud of Belarusians, because [the protests aren’t]about how much money I get, or salaries. They aren’t about the economy. This is about our key values. Dignity, freedom, and democracy. And I really hope that the new leadership will keep Belarusian national interest in mind,” says Katsiaryna. 

For some Belarusians, the protests are the first time that they have experienced such an overwhelming sense of national pride and unity in a country where political activism and civil society has been routinely repressed.

“I never liked my country,” explains Kaeshko. “Never liked the power, and most of the people here. I was always trying to detach myself from the fact that I am coming from Belarus. It all changed during three days of August. I have witnessed things that made me fall in love with the people of Belarus, made me proud to be a part of the community, the people, and the idea that we can be independent. The state failed us in every way, and Belarusians have risen to the occasion.” 

“A huge cultural and societal shift is happening now,” Kaeshko continues. “The emergence of civil society, the belief in oneself – no one we help us, but us – the politicization of society – every pupil now has a notion. Now everyone has a voice, wants to be heard, wants to affect the political landscape and take the faith in our own hands – that’s something I have seen in Europe and am so proud to see in Belarus. In the long run, the country will emerge way stronger, more united and conscious because of these events.”

As Belarusians stand arm in arm in the face of the riot police, they sing songs in a forbidden language, a testament to the power of their memories and the strength of their spirit. How the new administration chooses to reshape and reclaim Belarus’ national identity and memory is not only going to determine the future of Belarusians, but also how they interact with their past. The world will have to wait to see what kind of Belarus emerges from the smoke. 

Cat Buchatskiy is a junior studying International Relations.