After 26 years in office, Alexander Lukashenko was accused of rigging this month’s presidential election in Belarus that gave him a landslide win. Opposition candidate Svetlana Tikhanovskaya fled to safety in Lithuania after more than 7,000 protesters were arrested and many were beaten by police. Workers went on strike across the country and Lukashenko called Russian President Vladimir Putin for help. This was quite the U-turn: Only a month earlier he had accused Moscow of “engineering plots to overthrow him and sending mercenaries to disrupt the presidential elections.” Putin does not take kindly to criticism, whether internal or from foreign leaders — especially as Russia exports energy to Belarus at below market prices, a substantial support to the its economy, and state-owned Belneftekhim refineries export oil at market prices to the West. Although there are no clear parallels, events in Belarus have echoes of Ukraine in 2014. More importantly, they brought to the fore tensions between Europe and Russia that have existed since 1990. When the Berlin Wall fell, the Soviet Union was dissolved and the Warsaw Pact unraveled, power structures on the European continent changed for good. The late Egon Bahr, architect of Willy Brandt’s detente toward the former East Germany, never tired of reminding leaders that an eastward expansion of NATO would create new antagonism between East and West. Both the EU and NATO did expand eastward in what seemed to make sense to many former Warsaw Pact countries and to the Baltic nations, which had belonged to the Soviet Union; these countries were glad to be freed from Moscow’s yoke, and were seeking protection. Many also joined the EU and even the eurozone, liberating the entrepreneurial spirits of their well-educated populations and helping their economies grow. Although there are no clear parallels, events in Belarus have echoes of Ukraine in 2014. More importantly, they brought to the fore tensions between Europe and Russia that have existed since 1990. Cornelia Meyer For the EU it was an expensive but in their view worthwhile exercise, the motto being that prosperous and stable neighbors help overall prosperity and stability. NATO was pleased to expand its bulwark against Russia, which remained a nemesis — increasingly so over the past two decades. The expansion of the EU and NATO into Russia’s erstwhile sphere of influence has for a long time been a thorn in the side of Vladimir Putin. While he may have a tenuous relationship with Lukashenko, he cannot allow the situation in Minsk to get out of hand. This may not be easy. Unlike in Ukraine, Putin does not have an array of Moscow-friendly politicians and oligarchs to fall back on. Lukashenko rules with an iron fist, not allowing any divergent views, even if they favor Russia. Putin has cautioned against EU intervention in Belarus, and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said: “No one is making a secret of the fact that this is about geopolitics, the fight for the post-Soviet space.” For the EU the situation is clear; it is a union based on the values of democracy and human rights, and events in Minsk over the past two weeks do not conform with those values. However, the bloc is treading carefully because of the geopolitical ramifications. They held a virtual summit, after which German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron and European Council president Charles Michel called Putin. “For us, it’s quite clear that Belarus must find its own path for itself,” Merkel said, which must have gone some way to appeasing Moscow. Both the EU and Russia would prefer a harmonious resolution. Brussels is preoccupied with the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic fallout. Russia does not want to see the situation in Belarus spiralling further out of control either. The Kremlin is dealing with its own share of civil protests, especially in eastern Siberia after the arrest of local governor Sergei Furgal. The situation has not been improved by the suspected poisoning of opposition leader Alexander Navalny. Nevertheless, Russia will do what it can to keep Belarus close. It may even work with a democratic government, if it is willing to cooperate with Moscow. The problem with democracy, though, is that a government that collaborates with Russia today can be voted out tomorrow and replaced by one that favors the West. Even if a mutually acceptable and hopefully democratic solution to the situation in Belarus can be found, there is something in Lavrov’s statement about the “fight for the post-Soviet space.” As long as this is Moscow’s perception, it becomes Europe’s reality. And as Henry Kissinger once observed, perception is as important as reality. Cornelia Meyer is a business consultant, macro-economist and energy expert. Twitter: @MeyerResources Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect Arab News" point-of-view