Hurnievich: In history, the winner always looks like someone who had a plan. But it's unexpected events and coincidences that decide

During protests in Belarus in 2020. Photo: "Nasha Niva"

In August 1991, a group of radical communists wanted to stop the collapse of the USSR and staged a putsch, but paradoxically, it only accelerated the demise of the Soviet Union. The putsch failed, the communists were in shock, and this launched the "parade of independence." It wasn't anyone's brilliant plan. It was a terrible mistake by the communists, which the popular fronts, including the Belarusian Popular Front (BPF), took advantage of. Glory to them for that!!!

When Ceaușescu's regime collapsed in Romania, the impetus was not a brilliant multi-move strategy, but a demonstration rallied in support of the dictator. But something went wrong. Tired and indignant people began chanting slogans against Ceaușescu. Chaos ensued. The regime's "young hawks" took advantage of this and dealt with the tyrant. But this country's path to democracy is still far from easy.

Read about how totalitarianism collapsed in Albania. It's an extremely complicated story there. I think even the Albanians themselves are shocked that today they are a free country.

The changes in Poland did not happen as a result of a brilliant plan by "Solidarity."

After the introduction of martial law in 1981, the opposition went deep underground. But the imminent collapse of the USSR and the economic crisis in Poland itself forced the communists to compromise and announce partially free elections. There were no million-strong marches that would have compelled Jaruzelski to do this. But the communists resoundingly lost those elections, having overestimated their capabilities. Although part of that opposition still argues today that the "round table" was a mistake and that the communists should have been ousted by force.

In the Baltic countries, there was also no brilliant plan after the occupation. The Soviet Union began to crumble – they seized the opportunity. If there had been a magnificent plan, what prevented its implementation decades earlier? Because the strong Soviet regime was in the way. And why did Finland become independent in 1917, and not in 1910? Because in the latter case, tsarism was still strong, and 7 years later, it was gone. And it wasn't the Finns who overthrew it at all.

Lukashenka's regime is also strong. He didn't come to a ready-made dictatorship in 1994; he built it step by step, thoughtfully, meticulously, setting up an "excellent" system. Not just through bayonets, let's be honest. Many fail to hold on for long even with bayonets. And we return to 2020. Opposition leaders, party members, candidates are in prison. Some talented leaders are abroad. Tsikhanouskaya had just left, she had zero experience in politics, and was in a depressive state. Chaos, nothing could be predicted.

And then a million people came out across the country. Such a thing had never happened before. It was a surprise for everyone. Back then, it seemed that the authorities were hanging by a thread, that they would retreat, that they would be forced to seek compromise, because society was in "disarray and upheaval." The most rational thing for the opponents of the authorities in such a situation was to deepen the political crisis, which desacralizes the top leadership and demotivates the elite. And this was happening.

I remember a meeting with Henadz Davydzka in those days. He, a loyal watchdog of Lukashenka, said directly: people, you have won, Lukashenka will not be the same as before, and now we need to seek agreement. And many local authorities began to backpedal. They allowed rallies, invited the opposition for discussions.

The regime also had no plan. It was simply that a system with 30 years of experience proved stronger than intelligent, beautiful, brave, and peaceful people.

Exactly the same thing happened in Poland in 1981. I will insist that this is the most optimal example for us. They had everything: widespread hatred for communists, powerful national consciousness, a million-strong "Solidarity" (an organization, not a chaotic mass in the streets), the support of the Church, a general strike in factories, global solidarity, the authority of John Paul II. The authorities, it seemed, suffered a fiasco and retreated. And yet the opposition did not succeed. A small victory and compromise with the regime in 1980, when their demands were met, was followed by 1981 – martial law and a complete collapse of the opposition. And Poles who perfectly understand Belarusian realities, such as Agnieszka Romaszewska and historian Antoni Dudek, have no doubt that Lukashenka's regime's behavior in 2020 was harsher than in the Polish People's Republic during martial law.

"Solidarity" won after 8 years. But… unexpectedly, after a few years, it lost power because people were disappointed, their lives did not quickly improve. Post-communists, the very ones who suppressed the opposition, returned to power. And here is the biggest surprise. They, who had been kissing Moscow comrades just 5 years prior, became a pro-Western government that brought Poland into the EU and NATO.

Did the communists have such a plan in 1989 when they announced free elections? Of course not.

In history, the winner always looks like someone who had a plan. But it's unexpected events, coincidences, the state of fear within the authorities, internal contradictions, confusion, context, and most importantly, I think, the personal interests of the most invested players that decide. Only a fumbling movement, with a blindfold on, and the ability to take advantage of conditions are possible, but by no means a calculated brilliant scenario.

• 15
• 1
• 1
• 2
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0