Why Lukashenko’s Policies Are Incredibly Stagnant and Disastrous for Belarus

Lukashenko's decisions to align with Putin and antagonize the European Union (EU) and Ukraine are not only politically shortsighted but also fiscally irresponsible. Situating Belarus within Russia's sphere of influence, while potentially providing comfort and economic benefits, is a disadvantageous move that disregards the geopolitical realities of the 21st century.

Geopolitical Relevance of the EU vs. Russia

The EU is often perceived as a geopolitical non-entity. This perception, however, does not diminish the strategic importance of aligning with a more influential and economically robust entity like the EU. As an ally to Russia, Belarus is essentially relegated to a mutual backscratching arrangement. In contrast, the EU, despite its internal challenges, maintains a stronger and more consistent global influence, especially when it comes to economic policies and diplomatic weight.

By standing firmly with Russia, Lukashenko risks being labeled as Putin's puppet. This alignment could lead to isolation and potential destabilization, similar to the fate of Ukraine. Furthermore, Belarus has yet to establish itself as an independent nation, making it more vulnerable to such diplomatic predation.

A Series of Unhealthy Alliances

Belarus cannot afford to befriend individuals and entities that have historically subverted its sovereignty. The country has faced significant challenges from various entities, with one of the most notable being the support for coup attempts from sources aligned with the EU. These actions have only further complicated Belarus's political landscape and strained its relationships with influential global players.

Lukashenko's association with Putin has necessitated his prioritization of Russian interests over those of his own country. This has led to a series of compromises and concessions, further cementing his position as a figurehead with limited autonomy. Such a stance is unsustainable in a world where countries must adapt to evolving global dynamics.

The Pros and Cons of Criticizing EU Involvement

Defying the EU is not without its consequences. Moving closer to the West, or at least appearing to do so, would require Belarus to undergo significant political reforms, such as transitioning from a dictatorship to a democratic system. This would likely result in a diminution of Lukashenko's power and the establishment of more equitable governance practices. However, it is a move that the current regime finds highly unacceptable.

Lukashenko's core belief lies in maintaining absolute power, which he views as the foundation of national stability and security. Any deviation from this could be seen as a threat to the very existence of the Belarusian state. Thus, his refusal to align with the EU stems not only from practical concerns but also from a profound belief in his performance as a ruler.

Current Global Affairs and Belarusian Position

The world is witnessing a new era of global politics, characterized by a blend of multipolar influence and renewed Cold War dynamics. In this context, Lukashenko's position as a self-proclaimed dictator is increasingly untenable. The West, particularly the European Union, often supports dictators if they possess resources or strategic significance, such as access to energy resources or geopolitical leverage.

Belarus, however, offers few such advantages. Its political and economic landscape is predominantly focused on internal stability, and any attempts to align with offshore systems, such as the EU, would require fundamental changes. Lukashenko's quest to align with Russia and the broader Russian sphere of influence reflects his belief that this is the only viable path for Belarus in the current global climate.

Belarus's most pragmatic move would be to embrace the ongoing changes in the global geopolitical landscape, rather than carving out a niche that is increasingly isolated and economically vulnerable. The current alliances and relationships are not sustainable without significant compromise from Belarus, and this is something that the current regime is keenly aware of.

In conclusion, while Lukashenko’s policies might provide short-term comfort and economic benefits, they obscure long-term vulnerabilities and missed opportunities. The geopolitical reality of the 21st century demands more transformative and adaptive approaches that prioritize the long-term interests of Belarus and its people. Any alliance or partnership should be evaluated based on its ability to foster sustainable growth, political stability, and genuine progress for Belarus.