Joerg Forbrig is senior fellow and director for Central and Eastern Europe at the German Marshall Fund of the United States think tank.
European Union foreign ministers will convene Friday against the backdrop of a worsening crisis in Belarus. Longtime ruler Alexander Lukashenko was clearly voted out in last Sunday’s presidential election, but instead of conceding defeat, he has declared war on the Belarusian people.
All across the country, peaceful protesters have been violently targeted by security forces, with thousands arrested, hundreds wounded and some even killed. The EU and many of its member countries have been quick to condemn this criminal conduct. They must now follow up with concrete measures to support the Belarusian people and to punish those who have unleashed state terror against them.
First, the EU should clearly state that Lukashenko is not the legitimate president of Belarus. He has long been and is, even more obviously now, a plain usurper. With this election, he has lost whatever legitimacy he may have had left.
His power now fully rests on the batons and guns of his extensive security apparatus. And even that base is weakening, as an increasing number of officers refuse to turn against their own people.
Belarusians — both ordinary citizens and elites — consider Lukashenko illegitimate. That should also be the EU’s official position.
Others in the state apparatus have started to defect, too. Journalists from state media refuse to serve as propagandists, diplomats have allowed for a fair vote count at embassies abroad and state enterprises have gone on strike.
Belarusians — both ordinary citizens and elites — consider Lukashenko illegitimate. That should also be the EU’s official position.
Along with that, a more principled rethinking of EU policy vis-à-vis Belarus is necessary. For several years now, the union has viewed the country mainly through a geopolitical prism. Against the background of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, the EU has bought into Lukashenko’s narrative that he is the sole guarantor of Belarusian independence and stability.
This so-called pragmatist engagement has not only ignored that Lukashenko has steadily worsened the country’s political and financial dependence on Russia. It also failed to yield, to the frustration of many EU diplomats, any substantial results, whether deeper EU-Belarus cooperation or real improvements for ordinary citizens.
Instead, the impression among many in Belarus is that the EU’s fundamental values — respect for human rights, democracy and fair elections, freedom of the media and civil society — are negotiable.
In their eyes, the EU has been opportunistic at best and dishonest at worst, applying double-standards at the expense of the Belarusian people. Their disappointment is apparent in the complete absence of any EU flags or imagery at the ongoing protests, which had been standard requisites at democratic risings in Belarus previously and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.
The EU has a chance to correct its misguided course and side clearly with ordinary citizens and change-oriented elites in Belarus as they defend their right to determine the country’s leadership and its future.
The EU’s immediate response should include several elements.
First, EU foreign ministries should instantly call in Belarusian ambassadors to express their strongest rejection of the actions of the Belarusian government.
At the same time, they should acknowledge, where applicable, the courage of Belarusian diplomats to conduct honest vote counts. At many embassies and consulates, which also serve as polling stations for expatriates, results were published that demonstrated Lukashenko’s defeat.
Second, the EU and its member countries should, through their envoys in Minsk, show a maximum presence and offer support. They should visibly roam the protests, engage with people and observe police behavior.
The standoff may not be overcome without an impulse from abroad | Sergei Gapon/AFP via Getty Images
They should attend trials against peaceful protesters, give interviews to independent media, invite engaged citizens and victims of police brutality to their embassies and regularly meet with key human-rights defenders.
Third, the EU and its member countries must ready humanitarian aid to all those who have suffered from the repression in the last days and weeks. Thousands have been arrested arbitrarily, mistreated in custody and severely injured. Many are now being tried and fined in court.
Belarusians have launched a massive campaign to help, with €1.5 million raised to date. More will be needed for legal assistance and fines, medical help to victims and financial support to their families, psychological and physical rehabilitation and relocation to safe countries. Europe can, and must, urgently help to mitigate this human cost borne by Belarusians.
Fourth, the EU should propose an international mission to mediate in the crisis. The standoff between a regime determined to cling to its illegitimate power and a society equally determined to assert its rights may not be overcome without an impulse from abroad.
The EU should also consider longer-term measures, especially if Lukashenko retains the upper hand over the people.
An honest attempt by EU policymakers — perhaps a trio of senior parliamentarians from different member countries or a political dialogue between the regime and society under the auspices of the OSCE — would be worth undertaking. It would send a signal of constructive engagement to Belarusian society, while to the Lukashenko regime, it may be preferable to Russian interference in the situation.
In parallel to these immediate responses, the EU should also consider longer-term measures, especially if Lukashenko retains the upper hand over the people. Several steps could be used to punish the regime for its actions.
The EU should prepare to sanction those who have been personally involved in election fraud and violence. Similar to the Magnitsky-style lists and acts adopted by some member countries, the EU should compile a directory of offenders.
In so doing, it can draw on data that has already been collected by Belarusian human rights groups on hundreds of regime representatives. Individuals included should be excluded from official contacts, be denied visas and have their EU-based assets frozen.
In addition, the EU should address the financial underpinnings of the Lukashenko regime. It should stop any direct transfers of funding under the Eastern Partnership and other programs to state and government institutions. The EU should also advise European banks to reject the placement of Belarusian government bonds, a method of choice by cash-strapped Minsk to raise funds.
Meanwhile, support to Belarusian civil society and independent media needs to be ramped up. Available EU funding is too scarce, inaccessible and restrictive for many Belarusian democrats, including social-media activists, cultural workers, engaged citizens in the country’s regions and the diaspora. These are all playing a key role in the civic awakening that is taking place, and they deserve much stronger support than they have received to date.
Finally, the EU can support efforts at documenting recent and ongoing state crimes against the people. It should fund an independent observatory based, for the time being, outside Belarus.
Such an effort will be needed to collect and organize the thousands of pieces of evidence that have now amassed on the Lukashenko regime’s abuses. This would send a clear signal to abusers and their victims that ongoing crimes will not go unpunished.
In all these respects, the EU can and must respond to the tragedy that Lukashenko and his henchmen are inflicting upon the Belarusian people. Clearly siding with the latter and resolutely acting on the former is the least the EU can do for its neighbor — and for its own credibility.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article misstated when EU foreign ministers will convene. They will convene Friday.