The Belarusian opposition’s recently declared aim for the country to join the European Union was criticised by some for being at odds with the demands of people living inside Belarus. But this criticism is misguided.
In an openDemocracy opinion article, Paul Hansbury argued the EU aspirations of exile leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya could distance her from the Belarusian public. Although Hansbury poses the right question – how to ensure Belarus’s democratic forces stay united and do not lose connection with people inside Belarus – I believe he is mistaken on how to achieve these goals.
Firstly, he states Tsikhanouskaya’s EU aspirations could further divide opponents to Lukashenka. This argument is founded on a false premise. The main goal of all opponents to Alexander Lukashenka is to get rid of Alexander Lukashenka, hold free and fair elections, and have a democratic transition in Belarus.
The geopolitical developments over the last few years have clearly shown that one of the main obstacles to realising this goal is the Kremlin’s destructive influence and interference in Belarus. The Kremlin helped Lukashenka to stay in power during the 2020 post-electoral protests. It continues to support and cooperate with the Belarusian regime to advance its goals in Ukraine.
To weaken the Lukashenka regime, it is necessary to minimise Russia’s leverage in Belarus. Tsikhanouskaya’s pro-European agenda could be crucial for realising this goal. Closer links with the EU can help to unite democratic Belarus and Ukraine in their fight against dictatorial regimes, increase the chances of democratic transition in Belarus and thus achieve the common goal pursued by all representatives of Belarusian opposition. Therefore, Tsikhanouskaya’s European aspirations have a strong potential not to divide but, on the contrary, unite the opponents of Lukashenka, including those inside Belarus.
Another argument, already mentioned, is that the EU declaration is at odds with Belarusian public opinion.
Opinion polls conducted in a consolidated authoritarian country, such as Belarus, especially during a phase of brutal repressions, should not be taken at face value.
Citizens in Belarus fear expressing their true opinions openly due to potential repercussions from the government, which leads to self-censorship and biased poll responses. Even in democratic countries, opinion polling should be ideally combined with other methods to obtain rigorous research results.
In addition, the media landscape in Belarus affects the validity of polls. There is currently limited access to independent news sources. State-controlled media dominates the media consumption in Belarus, shaping public perceptions and opinions. Propaganda and misinformation are widespread, which also influences public perceptions and, by extension, poll responses.
Tsikhanouskaya’s European aspirations have the potential not to divide but, on the contrary, unite the opponents of Lukashenka
Lastly, the Chatham House opinion polls on Belarus are conducted online and have limited access to certain groups of the Belarusian public, leading to sample bias as certain perspectives are underrepresented.
Once the citizens of Belarus have access to alternative sources of information and obtain opportunities to travel, work and study in the EU, their geopolitical preferences can change. One of Tsikhanouskaya's goals can focus on developing a strategy for reaching Belarusians with reliable information about the EU and Russia, so that they can make informed choices about their geopolitical preferences.
The EU declaration doesn’t solely represent Tsikhanouskaya’s and her team’s view on Belarus’ foreign policy stance. It emerged from expert discussions involving analysts, researchers and representatives of civil society and therefore, demonstrates the preferences of a larger part of Belarusian society.
Hanbury also argued that Tsikhanouskaya’s geopolitical neutrality in 2020 compromises her current pro-European agenda. It doesn’t.
It is true that Belarusian opposition’s 2020 electoral campaign and the initial wave of post-electoral protests were not geopolitical in nature. Instead, they were focused on democratic changes inside Belarus. Tsikhanouskaya did not have any prior experience in politics before 2020, and she entered the electoral race only because she decided to support her husband, Siarhei, who was detained and could not participate in elections. Naturally, democratic transformations in Belarus, including free and fair elections and the release of political prisoners, were the main focus of Sviatlana’s campaign. This focus resonated with the demands of the Belarusian electorate.
The first resolution of the Belarusian opposition’s Coordination Council pursued a similar goal. In fact, it did not discuss the geopolitical choice of Belarus or mention Russia, as Paul Hansbury claims. Even if the subsequent resolutions contained references to “not fully reorienting away from Russia”, it is fully justifiable that at the very start of her work as opposition leader, Tsikhanouskaya was advised to take a more cautious approach toward the Kremlin.
It is far more important how Tsikhanouskaya and her team reacted to Russia’s aggression in Ukraine: they quickly adopted a very firm anti-Russian position. Tsikhanouskaya is not the only one who has hardened her stance towards Russia after 2022. Most of the EU countries that used to have working relations with the Kremlin have condemned Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and cut ties with Moscow completely. Sviatlana’s and her team’s previous position towards the Kremlin, which seems to have been less critical, is not a reason for doubting the strength of her current pro-European aspirations.
Overall, stronger ties with the EU will increase the chances of the Belarusian opposition to weaken Russia
Lastly, it is also difficult to agree with Hanbury’s claim that the EU will lose focus on Belarus if it supports an opposition with membership aspirations.
Supporting the Belarusian political opposition’s pro-European aspirations would help the EU increase its bridge-building role between those in exile and those left in Belarus.
Deeper cooperation can enable the EU and the Belarusian democratic forces to develop an effective strategy for releasing political prisoners – a crucial component of keeping connection with Belarusians inside Belarus. The EU should be part of this process: it can exercise the sanctions pressure on the Lukashenka regime, while the Belarusian democratic forces can help to activate the necessary levers of influence in the EU through advocacy.
In addition, support of the pro-European agenda will help to activate a set of preparatory steps in the form of comprehensive reforms. The opposition’s Declaration urges the EU to enhance cooperation and adopt a visa-free regime for Belarusian citizens and promote cultural and educational exchanges, such as special programmes for students. It’s difficult to imagine how these forward-thinking measures could break links with Belarusian society or could be perceived as harmful, even by those Belarusians who may currently hold limited pro-European sentiments.
Keeping a connection with Belarusians in Belarus has always been part of Tsikhanouskaya’s work, according to the annual report she shared with the Belarusian expert community. Her team has been developing several activities to build links with Belarusian citizens, some of which, however, cannot be made public due to security reasons. Certainly, closer cooperation with the EU can help to gain the necessary support to develop new activities, resulting in a stronger bridge-building role of the EU in Belarus.
Overall, stronger ties with the EU will increase the chances of the Belarusian opposition to weaken Russia, and therefore speed up the process of democratic transition in Belarus. By the time political changes take place in Belarus, the democratic forces will have the necessary support of the EU and be well-prepared to take the leading role in the transformation process in Belarus. The fall of the Lukashenka regime could then leave Belarus with a viable alternative that would be a great victory for Belarus and Belarusians.
