Since his student days, Andrei Dmitriev (born 1981) has been actively involved in strengthening Belarusian civil society and building democracy and the rule of law. Dmitrijew has repeatedly been subjected to official repression because of his political activities. Even after serving his most recent prison sentence of 18 months, Dmitrijew does not want to leave Belarus and continues his political and civil society work. In contrast to more than a few Belarusian opposition members, Dmitrijew views the resumption of contacts between the West and Belarus as inevitable. Otherwise, Belarus would lose its independence and finally fall under Vladimir Putin's rule.
In spring 2023, you were sentenced to 18 months in prison for taking part in mass protests against serious electoral fraud in the 2020 presidential elections. You were one of the opposition candidates in those elections. What exactly was the starting point for the largest anti-government protests in the history of Belarus?
At that time, the issue was not solely about the elections, although they certainly played a significant role. Rather, it was a direct clash between a large part of society and the authorities; it was about conflicts that had been building up for a long time. The pandemic, the overall sense of insecurity, and the absence of hope for reform within the current system intertwined to form a complex web that ultimately broke in 2020. People felt that they had reached the end of their tether and took a step forward. They took a leap of faith towards change. It was a truly heroic act. Belarusians did more than anyone expected of them. Unfortunately, we lacked leaders who could effectively channel this energy. Many people thought that change would happen quickly, but the reality turned out to be much more complicated.
What is the main difference between the earlier protests and the 2020 protests?
The main difference is that in 2020, people from all social strata, age groups, and professions took to the streets and got emotionally involved to say together, ‚We are here; we must not be ignored!‘ It was about our nation's future and treatment of its citizens. The protests were a kind of declaration of resistance: ‚We don't want to live by the old rules; we need an alternative!‘ The issue was ourselves, not foreign policy or a West-Russia decision.
What remains of the protests after more than four years?
The main result is the realization that the majority of Belarusians want to live in a normal democratic country, in a constitutional state. We have matured politically as a nation. We will not be the same after 2020, nor will Belarus. Even those who once believed sweeping changes were possible now acknowledge the challenging journey ahead. Up until 2020, there was a chance for a gradual relaxation of the regime and for change, achieved through evolution rather than revolution. Many people in civil society sensed this at the time and now look back on it with sadness. However, I don't believe that this conviction was based on illusions or naivety; rather, it was a strategy for caring for people. We could have achieved lasting change if all sides had been willing to engage in dialogue.
What exactly would such peaceful coexistence between society and the authorities have entailed?
A peaceful coexistence could have started with simple things: including the opposition in parliament and local councils and greater freedom for civil society. Most importantly, abandoning the ‚us against them‘ logic. We all want to live in an independent and peaceful Belarus. I believe that there was an opportunity to reach an agreement up until October 2020, but there was a lack of political will. After that, the authorities opted for an extremely harsh crackdown on the protesters, and the window of opportunity closed. Today, of course, the situation is worse, especially after Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine began. In 2020, we could still seek a compromise; today, it has become much more difficult. However, it is still necessary.
Since the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has been using the territory of the Republic of Belarus as a retreat area and has also been firing on Ukrainian cities from Belarusian territory. From the point of view of international law, Belarus is therefore a party to the conflict. But why has Minsk not yet sent troops to Ukraine?
At the moment, there is no shelling from Belarusian territory, and Minsk is trying hard to conceal all problematic events. The Belarusian authorities are aware that sending troops into Ukraine would be suicidal. Society is categorically opposed to war—both supporters and opponents of the regime. This is what distinguishes us from Russia. Lukashenko knows that Belarus would lose even the appearance of sovereignty if it sent troops. For this reason, Lukashenko is taking all necessary steps to support Moscow discreetly and primarily through non-military methods, such as protecting the union state's borders without Russian involvement and assisting Moscow in the trade sector. The red line for Minsk is direct participation in the war.
Can we still view Alexander Lukashenko, the self-proclaimed president, as a guarantor of the Republic of........© Berliner Zeitung