{"id":150649,"date":"2025-08-12T10:02:34","date_gmt":"2025-08-12T07:02:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pozirk.online\/en\/longreads\/150649\/"},"modified":"2026-04-15T13:35:32","modified_gmt":"2026-04-15T13:35:32","slug":"belarus-opposition-debates-sanctions-dialogue-road-ahead","status":"publish","type":"longreads","link":"https:\/\/pozirk.online\/en\/longreads\/150649\/","title":{"rendered":"Belarus\u2019 opposition debates sanctions, dialogue, road ahead"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

At a tense conference marking five years since the 2020 Belarus uprising, opposition leaders clashed over sanctions, readiness to use force and the prospects for a national dialogue. While hardliners won more support, deep questions remain over strategy, Western engagement and how to turn political potential into real change.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n \"\"\n
\n
\n\n Siarhiej and \u015aviat\u0142ana Cichano\u016dski at a rally in Warsaw on August 9\n <\/div>\n \n
\n (Pozirk)<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Supporters of sanctions against \u201cappeasers\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Five years have passed since the popular uprising in Belarus brought a new generation of opposition leaders to the forefront of the struggle against Alaksandar \u0141uka\u0161enka\u2019s regime. Yet he has clung to power even more tightly, leaning heavily on Moscow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The heady belief in swift change that gripped the nation in 2020 has faded for many. Opposition slogans no longer electrify the masses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Searching for a path to change<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The mainstream opposition maintains that sanctions are the way forward. Pavie\u0142 \u0141atu\u0161ka, the most ardent advocate of \u201cpressure until victory,\u201d clashed at a recent conference with those he views as regime appeasers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe marathon is not for everyone. It\u2019s your right to step off the track. But don\u2019t try to slow down or stop the others,\u201d he told them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In live polling, a majority sided with the hardliners. Two-thirds, for instance, supported U\u0142adzimir \u017dyhar of BelPol over Ivan Kra\u016dco\u016d, perceived as an \u201cappeaser.\u201d \u017dyhar earned applause with his jab: \u201cI\u2019d pay you for a ticket to Minsk \u2014 go and negotiate [with \u0141uka\u0161enka] there!\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In another debate, D\u017amitryj \u0160\u010dyhielski, political representative of the Kastu\u015b Kalino\u016dski Regiment in Ukraine, argued that the opposition must also be ready to use force and should form Belarusian units within EU armies. He defeated political scientist Roza Turarbekova, whose academic approach drew less support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Radical proposals may win ovations. Still, Kra\u016dco\u016d noted that if peace comes to Ukraine, the West might lift war-related sanctions on both Moscow and Minsk. He urged trading some sanctions for the release of political prisoners \u2014 before it is too late.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Buying Kra\u016dco\u016d a ticket to Minsk would be easy. Ensuring that hundreds of thousands of Belarusians can return home safely is far harder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

National dialogue: near future or utopia?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Participants also debated what might follow the planned meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska later this week.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sviatlana Cichano\u016dskaja suggested that a ceasefire in Ukraine could open a window of opportunity for Belarus: \u201cWe need to be ready for it,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u0141atu\u0161ka agreed that \u201copportunities may soon arise\u201d for tactical \u2014 and possibly strategic \u2014 decisions on Belarus. He promoted the United Transitional Cabinet\u2019s proposal for a national dialogue, an idea Cichano\u016dskaja has pushed for weeks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The initiative aims to insert the opposition into potential negotiations between Washington and Minsk. Yet many conference attendees noted that \u0141uka\u0161enka refuses to engage with his opponents, while Trump, focused on ending the Russian\u2013Ukrainian war, is unlikely to convene a round table for critics of what he sees as a minor dictator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u0160\u010dyhielski argued that the democratic camp must become a force capable of compelling the regime to negotiate. \u0141atu\u0161ka dismissed the idea of talking with \u0141uka\u0161enka in the near term, framing a round table as a distant prospect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Can Trump help?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Geopolitics could take an ominous turn if Washington compromises Ukraine\u2019s interests and territory to appease the Kremlin. That would leave Putin and \u0141uka\u0161enka in a stronger position.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cichano\u016dskaja told Pozirk<\/em> she feared that \u201cwhen the question arises of lifting sanctions from Russia, sanctions from Belarus might be lifted as well.\u201d Her team has long supported harmonizing sanctions against Moscow and Minsk \u2014 a point Kra\u016dco\u016d underscored.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to Simon Shuster\u2019s widely discussed Time<\/em> article, US officials are engaging with \u0141uka\u0161enka to leverage his ties to Putin. Political prisoners, it seems, are a secondary concern. If that is the case, once the White House has used the Belarusian autocrat, it may lose interest in the fate of regime prisoners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the worst-case scenario, as Coordination Council member Alaksandar Knyrovi\u010d warned, \u201ca Putin\u2013Trump deal might bury hopes for Belarusian independence.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Potential still there<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The conference\u2019s final resolutions contained few new ideas or concrete strategies for change. The national dialogue proposal, first floated five years ago, remains unrealized for lack of a workable implementation mechanism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u0141atu\u0161ka said the opposition has \u201ca plan for replacing officials\u201d in a post-\u0141uka\u0161enka scenario. The main resolution noted that a new Constitution and lustration framework have been drafted, and work has begun on a roadmap for Belarus\u2019 integration into the Council of Europe and the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the key question remains: how to implement these plans?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For now, the EU \u2014 while verbally supporting Belarusians\u2019 European aspirations \u2014 has effectively sealed off the country. Security concerns outweigh talk of mobility, and the pro-democracy forces have yet to change this reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u0141atu\u0161ka rejected calls to dissolve opposition structures, arguing it would be counterproductive. Knyrovi\u010d admitted their influence is limited but insisted they are necessary \u201cbecause they irritate the other side.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cichano\u016dskaja\u2019s team deserves credit for advancing its international agenda \u2014 something the Russian opposition lacks. Exiled opponents may have far fewer resources than the dictatorship they face, but they represent the most progressive segment of the nation. The spirit that mobilized Belarusians in 2020 could yet be revived.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n
\n \"\"