KYIV – Belarus is in revolt and a new Belarusian political nation has been born before our very eyes. The implications are far-reaching. Not only for the Belarusians themselves, but their diverse neighbors, Europe generally and even beyond.
So, what does this mean, at least for now, for Ukraine, Belarus’s southern neighbor? What was the state of bilateral relations before and after the critical presidential election of August 9, which tens of thousands of Belarusians throughout their country believe were rigged and deprived them of peaceful democratic change?
After 26 years of the authoritarian, purportedly paternalistic “Batka” (“father”-figure) Alyaksandr Lukashenka at the helm, whatever his merits for some segments of society, particularly the pensioners, apparently the overwhelming majority of society wanted him replaced by a more modern and progressive figure.
But, true to form, he rigged the election, which appeared to be undoubtedly going against him, yet again. His personal polling outfit, claiming in the absence of impartial international observers to be a “national” one, impudently declared he had won around 80 percent of the votes. And the rest has already become history.
The example and lessons of 2019 in Ukraine, where a political newcomer managed in fair and open elections to secure 73 percent of the votes and democratically replace the incumbent president has not been lost either on the Belarusians, who had watched with inspiration, or the Ukrainians themselves.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy did not rush to congratulate pro forma his Belarusian counterpart, with whom he seemed to have developed a good working relationship. Instead, on August 10, he reserved judgement about the validity of the results of the Belarusian election and echoed the concerns of his Polish and Lithuanian partners about the unjustified violence being applied against protesters and the need for a dialogue between the two sides.
Instead of going along with the automatic congratulations that came from China, Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Venezuela, Turkey and Azerbaijan, Ukraine aligned itself with its Western democratic partners.
TUT.BY
A standoff on August 9 between protesters and riot police in Minsk.
As is known, Mr. Lukashenka has survived by playing political games; he considers himself craftier than everyone else. He’s blown hot and cold with Russian President Vladimir Putin, given his dependence on Russian financing and energy, flirted when it has suited him with the West, and not neglected to develop the Chinese and other vectors.
Likewise, with Ukraine, Mr. Lukashenka’s tack has been not a balancing act, but a duplicitous role. He has pursued business ties to the extent it was expedient, assumed the role of a self-appointed quasi-honest broker in Minsk between Ukraine and Russia, and declared himself a true friend of Ukraine, while he continued to ingratiate himself with the Kremlin. The best example of that is official Belarus’s support for Russia in voting at the United Nations.
Nevertheless, while declaring that he would never permit a Maidan to occur in Belarus, Mr. Lukashenka managed to maintain seemingly good ties with both Presidents Petro Poroshenko and Zelenskyy. Last October, he visited Ukraine and had a cordial meeting with the current Ukrainian president at the Second Forum of the Regions of Ukraine and Belarus in Zhytomyr.
At the time, President Zelenskyy said: “We understand each other. I think our people are friendly, mentally close. I am proud and I am confident that every Ukrainian is proud that we have such good neighbors and relations.” Mr. Lukashenka invited President Zelenskyy to visit Belarus.
As the Belarusian presidential election approached, on July 29, Mr. Lukashenka indirectly involved Ukraine. He suddenly announced that Belarus’s law enforcement agencies had detained 32 members of the notorious “private” Russian Wagner mercenary army just outside of Minsk. It was reported that they included Ukrainian citizens and even those who had fought against Ukrainian government forces in the Donbas.
The Belarusian president insinuated that they had been sent to Belarus to engage in subversion and, playing an implicitly anti-Putin card before the election, implied that Ukraine would be able to seek the extradition of those linked to Ukraine.
On August 5, the Ukrainian and Belarusian presidents held a telephone conversation during which they discussed the extradition. Mr. Zelenskyy also expressed his personal gratitude to Mr. Lukashenka for the humanitarian assistance provided in July to the population of the western regions of Ukraine affected by heavy flooding. “This gesture of Belarus’s true friendship again underlines the values of partnership between our countries,” he noted.
Interestingly, as if to ingratiate himself with Ukrainians and liberal circles in Russia and elsewhere on the eve of the election, Mr. Lukashenka also gave a long TV interview to the Ukrainian journalist Dmytro Gordon. In it, he seemed very self-confident, evaded condemning Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and appeared to confirm his readiness to go ahead with the extradition of some of the Wagner fighters.
Questions were immediately raised about what was behind the Wagner issue, what role Russia was playing in the election scenario, and why Ukraine was being involved. They have not been answered.
The way in which Mr. Lukashenka conducted the presidential election and his use of brute force against peaceful protesters immediately placed his relationship with Mr. Zelenskyy and Ukraine in doubt. He forced the Ukrainian president to choose between maintaining pro forma cordial contacts with him, under the pretense that what has happened in Belarus is an internal matter, or to align himself with his Western partners. The Ukrainian leader has chosen the second.
On August 10, Mr. Zelenskyy called on Belarus, at this time of “serious crisis,” to refrain from using violence against the protesters and to open dialogue with them. Belarus, he said, is trying to “determine the vector of its further development, which is extremely difficult,” and the consequences can be far-reaching.
For the record, it should be noted that one of the first to greet Mr. Lukashenka was Viktor Medvedchuk, vacationing in Russian-occupied Crimea. The politician, businessman and close associate of Russian President Vladimir Putin signed himself as chairman of the Political Council of the pro-Russian Opposition Platform – For Life Party.
Mr. Medvedchuk wrote to Mr. Lukashenka: “The citizens of the Republic of Belarus confirmed that you remain the incontestable leader in your state. As a person who knows you for many years and treats you with the greatest respect, I believe that this leadership is based on the phenomenal diligence, responsibility and readiness to protect your country and your citizens.”
Since then, the protests in Belarus have continued, and the brutality shown by Mr. Lukashenka’s forces has not abated. As workers in the country’s major industrial enterprises have joined the revolt by coming out on strike, there has also been growing condemnation from Western states and human rights organizations.
Official Kyiv has said it will not comment further on the election until the official results are announced. In the meantime, it has expressed concern about the detention of several Ukrainians, journalists and others, some of whom were quickly deported. Kyiv has also formally requested the extradition of the Wagner fighters, something which Mr. Lukashenka, under pressure from Mr. Putin, would prefer to forget at this moment.
Obviously, many in Ukraine are treating the events in Belarus as their Maidan. But the Belarusian uprising has already taken on different forms and is not following the Kyivan scenario.
Leaderless and spontaneous so far, from the outset it has been massive and represented throughout most of country – not concentrated in one central spot. Secondly, it has successfully won support from major industrial enterprises and is using strikes as a powerful weapon. It is already more reminiscent of Solidarity’s resistance in Poland than what occurred in Ukraine.
The question now is how much real solidarity with Belarus will Ukraine and its real partners be prepared to demonstrate, especially when it comes to jointly applying sanctions, providing political asylum for political dissenters, advocacy and, if necessary, helping to overcome any information blockade imposed by President Lukashenka, if he lasts.
The worst-case scenario, that many Belarusian protesters are afraid of, is a Russian intervention. But that would transform the situation even more – for everyone.