Paznyak: Tsikhanouskaya and Babaryka are absolutely nothing. Everything they have is on other people's money, from lipstick to socks

Recently, certain changes have taken place in Belarusian democratic circles in exile. Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya's visit to Kyiv is being prepared, and Viktar Babaryka spoke in the European Parliament.

During an interview on "Belsat", the host drew attention to these events and asked Zianon Paznyak whether it is possible today to calculate who could realistically take power in Belarus.

"What you are talking about is complete emptiness. All Tsikhanouskayas, Babarykas – they are absolutely nothing. They have no power, no political capital, nothing," the veteran of the political movement emotionally responded.

"They (European structures — NN) provide money. I said: from lipstick to socks, everything they have, everything is on other people's money. Take away their money... These are NGOs (non-governmental organizations), and all their politics would be over," the politician argued.

As for the contacts between official Kyiv and Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya's Office, in Paznyak's opinion, Zelenskyy was pressured by Europe.

As the politician argues, European structures use the Belarusian opposition as a tool to promote their own interests.

"Europe is pursuing its own policy regarding Belarus. It created this proxy, these people it finances. They support sanctions, voice some European ideas. They are taken around to different countries.

And the tactic is very simple: firstly, by referring to them, they suppress Belarusians. Because what do sanctions mean? The regime doesn't care; it turned to Russia. This mainly destroys the state.

Secondly, if any changes occur — and it's quite obvious they will — then they can enter Belarus on the back of their proxy, facilitate democracy, and that's it. And have, so to speak, their own puppets."

Paznyak compares these methods to the policy of the USA towards Latin American countries in the last century. However, in his opinion, this scheme failed in the Belarusian case.

"An elementary policy, but quite crude. This is how it was done with South America; the [United] States did it that way. It's a template. This template hasn't worked with Tsikhanouskaya now. It hasn't worked, but it's still there."

As for Viktar Babaryka, the veteran of the democratic movement confidently states:

"If they want to make Babaryka a repeated proxy, it's even worse here. Nothing will come of it, because it's an absolutely played-out card, also without ideology, without anything. It will simply cause laughter.

Therefore, I don't consider it necessary to talk about this seriously. Especially since Belarusians have become wiser during these four years of war in Ukraine. They already know what this is, what a proxy is, what Babaryka is, what Gazprom is, what happened in 2020. The masses of Belarusians already know, their eyes have opened. They know all this. But these people were isolated; they are still living in 2020. It's not 2020 now, it's 2026."

America will manage the process of change in Belarus

In his opinion, the fate of Belarus depends on the fate of Ukraine:

"The main thing is to help Ukraine. Ukraine must win. And our warriors there must also unite, so that later, if necessary, they can come to Belarus. We don't need divisions. A company will be enough for us."

As Paznyak argues, today there is no alternative force in Belarus that could take power. Under such circumstances, in his opinion, the Venezuelan scenario, which could be implemented after the conclusion of peace between Ukraine and Russia, looks quite realistic:

"The situation is similar to that in Venezuela. Since the regime has annihilated, trampled, expelled everything to the ground, America will probably manage this process.

If peace occurs on Ukraine's terms (...), then it's quite possible that the focus will be on certain circles of the Lukashenka-era bureaucracy or nomenclature, which will be more loyal. It will adapt, by the way, and rebrand itself.

And on this basis, some kind of government will be created that will be more liberal. Probably, it will not be possible to get rid of Russia — if Russia remains strong — but I think it will remain strong. But to hope that something that doesn't exist will suddenly appear — there's no need, because it's unrealistic."

But the politician sees an opportunity for the country's development even under such a scenario:

"But even such changes that will occur, if there is a more liberal nomenclature that will understand that they are an independent state, that there is culture, that there are national interests — this will be a path that will allow for further development and lead, as they say, to a normal outcome. Therefore, this looks most realistic."

• 34
• 9
• 5
• 32
• 2
• 1
• 2
• 1