"Dissolve itself?" Artsiom Brukhan responds to criticism against the Coordination Council

"The best thing the Coordination Council could do is dissolve itself?" — Brukhan is surprised by what he has heard recently from people in the democratic movement.

"I understand why the suggestion for all democratic forces to dissolve themselves is voiced on various anonymous Telegram channels. But I honestly don't understand why such a thesis comes from people who are very respected and deeply knowledgeable in Belarusian politics.

Therefore, as the outgoing speaker of the 3rd convocation of the CC, I will try to explain with examples why the Coordination Council is not only needed, but also why it is important to participate in its elections.

Let's imagine that the Coordination Council dissolved itself in March 2025.

In the PACE resolution on establishing a tribunal for aggression, the amendment on the responsibility of the so-called leadership of Belarus for aggression against Ukraine would not have been introduced. Side events on the situation in Belarus, on the threat of the "Russian world," on the need to simplify the legalization of Belarusians would not have taken place at the sessions of PACE and the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, nor would there have been dozens of meetings with official delegations of Council of Europe countries. In the best case, we would have fallen to the level of the Russian opposition, which has only symbolic influence.

Meanwhile, Russian liberal media called the creation of a platform (not even a delegation) the main achievement of the Russian opposition. Without a delegation in the Congress, local authorities of Council of Europe countries would know nothing about transnational repressions; issues of legalization at the local level would not be raised, and in many countries, this is much more important than at the national legislative level.

In the OSCE PA, there would only be "parliament" deputies who would claim there are no repressions or political prisoners in Belarus, both during official speeches and behind the scenes. One person, or even a few, cannot cover inter-parliamentary work, cannot lobby Belarusian issues at all political levels — and only such lobbying can be effective.

Hundreds of letters for visa support would not have been written, and many legal consultations would not have been provided for Belarusians who found themselves in difficult situations."

Brukhan adds that among the results of the CC's work are hearings of the United Transitional Cabinet, where its representatives reported, recommendations for appointing various people to the Cabinet, and hearings of Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya.

"And we wouldn't know that for someone, Sviatlana's seating position is more important than substantive issues."

Brukhan continues: The CC is also generally about political culture and parliamentarism.

"There would be no heated discussions, demarches, or statements. There would be no understanding of how a parliamentary system works and, in general, what representative bodies are for. Just as it was in the early 90s. By the way, it was then that one person, who was then president, uttered words like "parliamentary farce," "chatterbox" about the Supreme Soviet. Here is the president and his vertical, who can solve all problems, and these parliaments can be dispersed. Unfortunately, that's what happened, and Lukashenka received the authority to dissolve any parliament if necessary. And society was not against it, because instead of understanding the importance of parliamentarism, it was easier to understand calls for the efficiency and sufficiency of the president and his administration.

Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, for example, supports the Coordination Council and understands the importance of this institution, rather than proposing to dissolve it.

Because if there were no Coordination Council, where and in what forms would the dissatisfaction of a part of the democratic movement be discussed and released into the public space? In insults, in hate, and other unpleasant things, rather than in a public discussion within the CC.

And this is also an important function of such bodies: to represent different groups and views, even contradictory ones.

Therefore, as speaker, I will defend the Coordination Council and will never agree with the thesis that it should be dissolved."

At the same time, Brukhan believes that the CC should be made more effective and influential.

"For example, I believe that the CC should be empowered not to recommend, but to appoint representatives of the UTC (United Transitional Cabinet) to positions, while the head of the UTC will retain the right to appoint representatives for defense and national security and for international and European cooperation.

And I am confident that sooner or later the situation will reach a point where dialogue or negotiations between democratic forces and representatives of the regime will begin. And it is the elected Coordination Council, as a real representative body with both an electoral mandate and recognition from international partners, that can represent the interests of the democratically-oriented part of society. It can also approve the composition of the "negotiators" delegation, which can include various politicians and other respected individuals, but not chaotically — rather, within a clear and fair procedure. And no better body than the Coordination Council can be found for this purpose."

In conclusion, Brukhan adds that the CC provides an opportunity to practice participating in elections.

• 12
• 4
• 1
• 4
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0