Do Belarusians need to choose between Russia and Europe? Shraibman and Lvovsky debate

Screenshots: chasiki_ / YouTube

Analyst Artyom Shraibman and economist Lev Lvovsky debated what choice Belarusians have in the current geopolitical situation in a new episode of the YouTube show "Hadzinnichak Tsikae" (The Little Clock Ticks).

Shraibman notes: even when the Belarusian people became politicized in 2020, the issue of geopolitical choice was not seriously raised.

“Overall, I don’t see an acute need in Belarusian society for a serious reflection like: ‘Let’s think, where will we go in decades, here or there?’ It seems to me that the dominant desire, perhaps an infantile one, perhaps one suffered through for centuries, is to be friends with everyone, to be hostile to no one, and not to break anything that works. Even if it’s an alliance with Russia. And not to make sharp experiments or sudden moves.”

Lvovsky, although agreeing that Belarusians would like to be friends with everyone and live as before, argues:

“But now we are not friends with everyone. The problem is that it's impossible to be friends with everyone now. And now, by all accounts, one must choose a side.

Yes, the Belarusian people do not want to choose sides, but not choosing a side does not mean we remain in Switzerland. Not choosing a side means we remain with Russia.

Therefore, a side will have to be chosen one way or another. Well, unless the current world completely collapses. If it completely collapses, then, of course, one should invest in gold, chocolate, and flee somewhere.”

Shraibman reflects: in the current reality, with Europe and Russia in conflict, Belarus will have no choice.

“The Belarusian parliament, under the current circumstances, will not debate – withdrawal or non-withdrawal from the CSTO. Given today's initial conditions, we are very tightly bound to Russia.

An alternative means Russian military control, which will come simply on bayonets. Before our internal, intra-Belarusian "chooser" can function, the basic condition for this scenario is that Russia has become different. And Russian-Western relations have become different.

And the level of hostility has decreased. (…) It is then that a window might open for Belarus to choose its geopolitical vector.

And whether it's Finland or not Finland, it doesn't matter, Switzerland or not Switzerland. But simply, a moment for discussion will appear and for the possibility of realizing this. And in this situation, why can't it be combined? It will be a different world, it will be a different Russia, it will be a different West, it will be a different system of coordinates in the region. This will definitely be after the war between Russia and Ukraine.”

In such a new reality, Shraibman believes, a new generation of democratic forces could propose an image of Belarus as “a friend of Russia who is not an enemy of the West.” Not Finland, as Sergei Tikhanovsky and Vadim Prokopyev currently suggest, but Kazakhstan.

“Kazakhstanization could also happen from above, from the perspective of Lukashenka and his removal from power, if he doesn't simply die in office.

But most importantly, I think something similar will be the image of the next Belarusian — I don't know if "opposition" is the right word — progressive part of the political spectrum. What will be closer to the mainstream of Belarusian public opinion. The idea that we remain friendly with Russia because of the economy, brotherhood, language, and so on, but at the same time, because we are at a crossroads, on trade routes, it is beneficial for us to be in good — as good as possible — relations with the West.”

• 3
• 3
• 2
• 3
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0