dw.com
Lukashenko's Seventh Term: Belarus Holds a Potemkin Election"
Belarus's January 26th, 2025, presidential election, expected to result in Alexander Lukashenko's seventh term, is characterized by a complete lack of opposition, suppressed media, and absent international observers, representing a stark departure from past elections and a step toward totalitarianism.
- What are the immediate consequences of the heavily controlled Belarusian presidential election on January 26th, 2025?
- Belarus's upcoming presidential election on January 26th will likely see Alexander Lukashenko, 70, re-elected for a seventh term, according to the electoral commission. His regime, internationally isolated and reliant on Russia since the 2020 fraudulent elections, aims for both recognition and record-breaking achievements. Over 2.5 million voters, or more than 35 percent, reportedly supported Lukashenko during the pre-election campaign.",
- How does the current election process differ from previous Belarusian elections, and what are the underlying reasons for these changes?
- The 2025 Belarusian election is designed not as a contest but as a show of loyalty to Lukashenko's regime, drastically different from previous elections where opposition had access to media and international contacts. This election features a complete suppression of independent media and observation, with even the election commission members remaining anonymous. The regime's actions aim to prevent a repeat of the 2020 protests sparked by widespread allegations of electoral fraud.",
- What are the long-term implications of the Belarusian regime's increasingly repressive tactics and its impact on both domestic and international relations?
- The Belarusian regime's shift towards totalitarianism is evident in the 2025 election. The lack of genuine opposition, suppression of dissent through mass arrests and imprisonment of political opponents, and exclusion of international observers demonstrate the consolidation of Lukashenko's authoritarian rule. The long-term impact will likely be continued international isolation and deepening dependence on Russia, with little prospect for democratic change in the near future.",
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames Lukashenko's re-election as a foregone conclusion from the beginning, using language like "likely to announce" and "should confirm loyalty." Headlines and subheadings could reinforce this predetermined outcome, potentially reducing reader engagement with alternative possibilities.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded terms such as "dictator," "lažirani izbori" (fraudulent elections), and "represije" (repression) which carry strong negative connotations. More neutral terms such as "long-serving president," "disputed election results," and "crackdown" could be considered for more balanced language. The repeated reference to Lukashenko as "70-year-old" might subtly emphasize his age as a factor.
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of potential international reactions to the election, beyond mentioning international isolation. It also doesn't detail the specific economic consequences of Lukashenko's continued rule or the potential impact on the Belarusian population.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by portraying the election as a choice between Lukashenko and a group of token opponents, ignoring the possibility of broader societal changes or alternative political systems.
Gender Bias
While the article mentions both male and female political figures, it doesn't analyze gender dynamics within the political system or identify any gender-based biases in the election process itself.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article details the suppression of opposition, lack of free and fair elections, and ongoing human rights abuses in Belarus under Lukashenko's regime. These actions directly undermine the rule of law, democratic processes, and human rights, thus negatively impacting SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The systematic silencing of dissent, imprisonment of political opponents, and lack of independent oversight during the election process all contradict the principles of justice, accountability, and inclusive political participation.