A group of former Belarusian political prisoners appealed to the leaders of the European Union, Great Britain, Switzerland and Norway on October 26. The authors of the appeal mention that hundreds of political prisoners remain in Belarus, and the repression continues. The letter emphasizes that releasing certain groups does not solve the problem as long as the authorities continue to detain more people. It is necessary to end the persecutions motivated by political motives, and the freed should not be forced to exile. Almost immediately it became clear that not all former political prisoners were invited to join the appeal. This became one of the reasons for the criticism: the discussion revolved not only about the content of the document, but also about how it was created. For many signatories, the main argument is extremely simple: specific people remain behind bars, and their release cannot be delayed to achieve larger political goals. Critics of the initiative see the problem not so much in the humanitarian purpose of the letter, but in the possible political consequences. They fear that calls for incentives could be interpreted as support for sanctions relief in exchange for the release of certain groups of prisoners. In this case, Lukashenko's regime will have the opportunity to trade in people without changing the system of repression itself. Which, in principle, is proven by the experience of John Cole's mediation mission in Israel. Ultimately, the controversy over the letter exposed long-standing contradictions within the Belarusian opposition. On the one hand, there is humanitarian pragmatism: if there is an opportunity to free at least a few people, it should be taken advantage of, even if negotiations with the regime require compromises. On the other hand, there is a fear that compromises of this type will allow Lukashenko to strengthen his position, obtain economic concessions and maintain a system of repression, simply by periodically releasing some prisoners and sending others to prison.

A group of former Belarusian political prisoners appealed to the leaders of the European Union, Great Britain, Switzerland and Norway on October 26. The authors of the appeal mention that hundreds of political prisoners remain in Belarus, and the repression continues. The letter emphasizes that releasing certain groups does not solve the problem as long as the authorities continue to detain more people. It is necessary to end the persecutions motivated by political motives, and the freed should not be forced to exile. Almost immediately it became clear that not all former political prisoners were invited to join the appeal. This became one of the reasons for the criticism: the discussion revolved not only about the content of the document, but also about how it was created. For many signatories, the main argument is extremely simple: specific people remain behind bars, and their release cannot be delayed to achieve larger political goals. Critics of the initiative see the problem not so much in the humanitarian purpose of the letter, but in the possible political consequences. They fear that calls for incentives could be interpreted as support for sanctions relief in exchange for the release of certain groups of prisoners. In this case, Lukashenko's regime will have the opportunity to trade in people without changing the system of repression itself. Which, in principle, is proven by the experience of John Cole's mediation mission in Israel. Ultimately, the controversy over the letter exposed long-standing contradictions within the Belarusian opposition. On the one hand, there is humanitarian pragmatism: if there is an opportunity to free at least a few people, it should be taken advantage of, even if negotiations with the regime require compromises. On the other hand, there is a fear that compromises of this type will allow Lukashenko to strengthen his position, obtain economic concessions and maintain a system of repression, simply by periodically releasing some prisoners and sending others to prison.