{"id":161407,"date":"2025-10-24T16:09:37","date_gmt":"2025-10-24T13:09:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pozirk.online\/en\/longreads\/161407\/"},"modified":"2026-04-15T13:35:32","modified_gmt":"2026-04-15T13:35:32","slug":"lessons-of-2020-what-can-save-belarus-finlandization-or-ditch-with-crocodiles","status":"publish","type":"longreads","link":"https:\/\/pozirk.online\/en\/longreads\/161407\/","title":{"rendered":"Lessons of 2020: what can save Belarus \u2014 finlandization or ditch with crocodiles?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Opposition politician Siarhiej Cichano\u016dski, speaking at the European Parliament (EP) on October 22, made it clear that Europe had not done enough to support Belarus\u2019s peaceful uprising in 2020. He suggested that the European Union should back the Belarusian opposition\u2019s plan to make Belarus \u201cthe next Finland of Eastern Europe.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n \"\"\n
\n \n
\n (pexels.com)<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Europe could not do much<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cFor a short time, there was a moment when we thought we could win. Some of [Alaksandar] \u0141uka\u0161enka\u2019s officials expressed sympathy, but lacked the courage to side with the people. Why? Because when the time came, Russia turned up for the battle, but Europe didn\u2019t,\u201d Cichano\u016dski said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, Russian President Vladimir Putin threw his weight behind \u0141uka\u0161enka, announcing that the Russian National Guard was on standby at the Belarusian border to intervene. The EU, meanwhile, has been widely criticized for its limited support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But could it really have done more than issue statements backing protesters, condemning the regime, and later imposing sanctions?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After the brutal election-night crackdown on peaceful demonstrators, subsequent rallies initially passed off without violence. Brussels declared the election fraudulent and refused to recognize the official results, announcing that sanctions were forthcoming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet when repression resumed, what more could the EU have done? It had no army to send. NATO, a Euro-Atlantic alliance, has no charter provision for intervention in Belarus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EP resolutions cannot stop Putin<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe were left alone, and Moscow took the upper hand,\u201d Cichano\u016dski said. \u201cHaving failed to stop Putin in Belarus, Europe made the war in Ukraine almost inevitable.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clearly, EP resolutions cannot stop Putin. Even sanctions have failed to compel him to make concessions, whether to European leaders or to US President Donald Trump. Only superior military strength can restrain a leader driven by imperial ambitions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, Europe remains reluctant to commit fully to aiding embattled Ukraine, while Trump merely teased Kyiv with offers of Tomahawk missiles before withdrawing them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To intervene in Belarus in 2020 would have meant staking a claim to territory the Kremlin considers its strategic outpost. Western strategists have long agreed that the West should avoid a direct military clash with Russia whenever possible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Radical action could have led to bloodshed and defeat<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Cichano\u016dski noted that the EU now plans to spend trillions of euros on defense. \u201cIt would have taken only a small fraction of that budget to change the game in Belarus in 2020,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, the new protest leaders in Belarus were short of resources\u2014aside from people\u2014just like the old opposition. Former banker Viktar Babaryka was arrested early in his campaign, and his assets were seized. Authorities claimed to have confiscated $900,000 from Cichano\u016dski, but that was a pittance for a revolution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even if the EU had provided financial aid, where could the money have gone? Brussels would never fund the purchase of weapons for a peaceful uprising, and printing leaflets or organizing workshops would hardly help the opposition defeat well-trained, well-equipped security forces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mika\u0142aj Dziadok, a politician released from prison earlier this year, argued that the masses should have followed the advice of \u201creal revolutionaries\u201d and taken more radical action. Yet most true fighters were already behind bars by then \u2014 Mika\u0142aj Statkievi\u010d and Pavie\u0142 Sieviaryniec among them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Everyone remembers \u0141uka\u0161enka\u2019s photos with a Kalashnikov rifle in hand. Had protesters stormed his palace or government buildings, the security forces would almost certainly have opened fire. And if they had faltered, Putin would have sent reinforcements. He was likely already planning the invasion of Ukraine and needed Belarus as a critical outpost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Radical action by the opposition would therefore have ended in defeat \u2014 and in far heavier losses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finland finally joins NATO<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Referring to Finland as a model for Belarus, Cichano\u016dski said the country \u201clearned to live beside a difficult neighbor and build a successful, independent state without going to war. It was a cautious balancing act and a wise strategy. Europe would benefit if Belarus became a neutral bridge between the EU and Russia.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He did not use the word \u201cfinlandization\u201d<\/em>, though many media outlets did. The term usually carries negative connotations, as postwar Finland had to make territorial and political concessions to Moscow. Thus, the parallel is of limited relevance to Belarus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is worth recalling that in February 2022 \u2014 weeks before Russia\u2019s full-scale invasion of Ukraine \u2014 French President Emmanuel Macron reportedly proposed to Putin a \u201cfinlandization\u201d plan for Ukraine, according to The New York Times<\/em>. Both Moscow and Kyiv rejected it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The USSR, however, respected Finland\u2019s neutrality. Today, Russian troops move through Belarus as if it were Russian territory. The two armies are closely integrated, Belarus reportedly hosts Russian tactical nuclear weapons, and Oreshnik missiles are expected to be deployed there soon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is hard to imagine Putin relinquishing such control and accepting a neutral Belarus. Incidentally, Finland itself has since abandoned neutrality and joined NATO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is still a chance<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Belarus still has a chance to become a democratic European state. After \u0141uka\u0161enka, pragmatic technocrats within the government may ease political repression and seek engagement with the West. The regime could gradually become softer and more tolerant of political pluralism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such a period could prepare the ground for rapid change when Russia eventually weakens \u2014 due to Putin\u2019s death, internal strife, separatism or economic decline. At that moment, the Belarusian opposition would need to seize the opportunity to take power and steer the country toward the EU and NATO \u2014 just as the Baltic states did after the Soviet collapse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Europe\u2019s support would be crucial in such a scenario.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Neutrality remains an appealing idea, one that fits well with the Belarusian mindset. But in practice, it seems utterly unrealistic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If, when the Russian empire weakens, Belarusians fail to separate themselves decisively \u2014 to dig, as some say, \u201ca ditch filled with crocodiles\u201d between themselves and Russia \u2014 the empire will inevitably return to reclaim what it believes is its own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ukraine stands as a grim reminder.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n
\n \"\"