Belarus Under Lukashenko: An Unusual Path Not Taken

Is Belarus a dictatorship, or does it follow the democratic path taken by other former Soviet republics? This question is often posed in the context of Western propaganda, which tends to frame the situation with a focus on the lack of democratic freedoms. However, a closer look at the historical and cultural context in Belarus suggests a more nuanced reality.

Is Byelorussia a Dictatorship?

It is true that the presidency in Belarus is elected through a democratic process, as with many countries around the world. However, the nature of this democracy is often questioned. The West, including the Baltic states and the European Union, portrays its democracies as reflecting the will of the people, leading to the assumption that the same should apply to any country that holds elections.

However, this view overlooks the unique challenges and historical circumstances that Belarus faces. Democracy, while a universal ideal, is often an anomaly in the context of post-Soviet states. The natural traditional form of government in many of these regions is often a centralized authority, rather than the fragmented political landscape that democracy often brings.

Why Didn't Belarus Follow the Democratic Path?

Belarus has not followed the democratic path taken by other former Soviet republics for several reasons. One of the primary reasons is the historical legacy of Soviet control. Countries like the Baltic states and Eastern Europe, which suffered under Soviet occupation, emerged with stronger national identities and a desire for freedom. In contrast, Belarus's cultural and historical context has led to a different trajectory.

The Belarusian people do not have a strong tradition of being advocates for democratic freedoms. This can be attributed, in part, to the fact that the people have not experienced true democracy before the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Soviet dictatorship had to suppress the people in the Baltic states due to their desire for independence, but in Belarus, the situation was different. Belarusians, particularly the majority, are more interested in economic stability and benefits like cheap gas and social security.

Older generations, in particular, prioritize their own financial security over the well-being of their children. This mindset is not unique to Belarus but is a common issue faced in many countries around the world, where parents often believe they are providing the best for their children despite their own biases and misperceptions.

The Role of External Factors

Another critical factor is the external influence on Belarus. The collapse of the Soviet Union left many countries with incomplete transitions to democracy. In these cases, existing governments continued to rule the “new” countries. Some regions, like the Baltic states, retained a strong national identity and emerged with a form of democracy, while others, including Belarus, saw minimal change in governance.

Belarus, like Russia, falls into the latter category. It is a managed democracy where the incumbent regime maintains a firm grip on power. Even when elections are held, the outcome is usually predetermined, as evidenced by the questionable integrity of the electoral process. If faced with a genuine challenge, the authorities can always rely on Russian military support, as seen in the past when President Lukashenko used Russian troops to suppress opposition.

A Warning from History

To understand the dangers of overestimating the democratic change in Belarus, one need only look at the history of Iraq in 1991, a country that attempted to overthrow a dictator. The uprising was brutally suppressed by the regime, leading to the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis. Similar scenarios could play out in Belarus, where the military is highly organized and equipped to deal with any form of opposition.

Belarusians do not have a historical tradition of freedom and do not readily assume control when given the opportunity. This has historically been exploited by external forces, such as Russian intervention, to maintain centralized control over the region.

Conclusion

Belarus’s path diverged from that of its neighbors for complex historical and cultural reasons. While its democratic process is flawed, it is a product of its unique circumstances. With a history of Soviet control and a lack of cultural tradition of democratic governance, the country’s trajectory is natural and understandable. Understanding this context is essential to comprehending the nuanced issues surrounding democracy in post-Soviet states.