logo
Trump Got Her Husband Out of Prison in Belarus. Here's What She Wants Him to Know.

Trump Got Her Husband Out of Prison in Belarus. Here's What She Wants Him to Know.

Yahoo14-07-2025
Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, an opposition leader in Belarus, hadn't heard from her husband Siarhei in more than two years. Not since Belarusian authorities placed him in 'incommunicado' detention, in full isolation. And then he called her.
'My dear wife,' he said. 'I'm free.'
He had been released from prison after negotiations between authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko and Trump administration officials, and was at the border between Belarus and Lithuania. He and 13 other political prisoners were heading to the American embassy in Vilnius.
Tsikhanouskaya and Siarhei have since reintroduced him to their children, traveled to a solidarity rally in Poland and done interviews with major news outlets. But both Tsikhanouskaya and her husband, a blogger and political activist who was preparing to challenge Lukashenko in Belarus' 2020 election when he was imprisoned, are grappling with the opposition's role in what comes next.
In an interview with POLITICO Magazine, Tsikhanouskaya described the joy of finally reuniting her family even as she said there was far more work to be done. She also made clear that a certain peace-seeking president could help her cause.
'We ask President Trump, go further, free them all,' she said. 'Use your influence again. We believe that you can do this, and Belarusians will never forget it.'
The administration's efforts in Belarus come as Trump continues to search for an end to Russia's war on Ukraine, and as Lukashenko looks for a means to end the political isolation his relationship with Vladimir Putin has wrought.
Along with freeing more political prisoners, Tsikhanouskaya is desperate to make sure Belarus isn't pulled further into Russia's orbit as part of negotiations to end Putin's war.
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
When did you know that your husband Siarhei would be freed?
The moment when I understood that he was free was when he called me from the border, just a direct call, and I heard his voice, and he told me, 'My dear wife, I'm free.' I could hardly believe this, because I was sure that he would be one of the last who would be released from prison, but who understands the logic of this regime? We had several lists of people to be released, humanitarian lists where people who were about to die were there and people who were incommunicado, some others. They chose Siarhei, I don't know why.
A lot has been made of the term 'incommunicado.' What exactly does that mean in the context of Belarus?
Incommunicado means that a person is kept in full isolation. Since March 2023, more than two years, we lost full connection with Siarhei. A lawyer wasn't able to attend to him. Letters were not received from my husband. Nothing. Just forced disappearance. And we have eight people at the moment on this list, and I wasn't sure if he was alive, what prison he's kept in, what state he's in. The regime is doing this to blackmail relatives, put a burden on the shoulders of their relatives. This knowing nothing about people is, of course, very, very painful.
Can you speak to what it was like to see Siarhei for the first time post-prison sentence?
It was, it is now, shocking to see him in such a state. He lost half of his weight. He says that for the last couple of months, they even gave him additional portions of butter, cottage cheese. When he got out of the minivan, I knew that he would be there, but if I had seen him somewhere else, I wouldn't have recognized him. And when he returned home, our young daughter didn't recognize him at all. I said, 'Dear, look who came?' And she just said, 'Hello, who are you?' And when he started talking, she just recognized his voice. Of course, there were oceans of tears, hugs, but prison changes people a lot. It's like gray face, like very skinny people.
It's difficult to see, but the physical state, maybe it's possible to improve somehow. But all those memories from prison, the emotional trauma, psychological trauma, it will not be able to be softened.
Has it set in that he's back? How has it been to have him back in the movement?
The release of Siarhei, it's brought a boost of energy to the Belarusian people, first of all. It was such news for people. And he's full of energy. For five years, he was thinking about new ideas, new projects, how to change the situation in Belarus. And now we have to use this momentum to direct more attention to the topic of Belarus, to the topic of political prisoners and the country's political disaster.
So, on the one hand, as a wife, I want to take care of him, I want him to relax a little bit. But on the other hand, I understand that he has to jump into the agenda. He's given so many interviews now, so many people want to meet him, to see him, and we have to use that momentum. And he's still realizing what has happened in the democratic movement. But, for sure he will join this movement as a strong speaker, as a leader, just to try to mobilize the energy of Belarusians.
Five years [since an anti-Lukashenko protest movement was violently quashed and Siarhei was first jailed], and people are exhausted. You know, people continue to fight. We are working on different projects in coordination with the people on the ground, but somehow people are losing, step by step, the energy. And he's a driver who can really, really attract attention. So Siarhei will focus on building new channels of communication with the workers, rural communities, entrepreneurs, officials. His voice is powerful and he speaks the language of people. Many Belarusians watched his first press conference, it gave maybe people inside the country new hope. Many people who believed in 2020, and were silent for five years, are active again.
Switching gears to politics — are you worried at all that the Trump White House might be legitimizing Lukashenko by negotiating with him on the release of political prisoners?
So first of all, President Trump really made a difference. His team — Gen. Keith Kellogg, John Cole, Chris Smith — took real action and it worked.
Trump has shown that diplomacy and pressure can bring results. He has leverage in the situation of Belarus and he used it. Now, we must maintain pressure on the regime. We have seen that the pressure works, and it is the most effective tool. I think that actually Belarus can be President Trump's foreign policy success story — a place where American leadership ends a crisis without war. It can be a victory that the world will notice. And we ask President Trump, go further, free them all. Use your influence again. We believe that you can do this, and Belarusians will never forget it. It was American diplomacy and mission that rescued this group of people. But for sure, without the strong and principled and firm position of the European Union as well, it wouldn't have brought this result. So again, President Trump can solve the crisis in Belarus, which lasts 30 years already, and it must be easier to bring changes to Belarus than to Russia.
Of course, there is gossip that this visit of Gen. Kellogg might look like legitimization of the regime, but I trust that our American partners know who they're dealing with. And it was President Trump, actually in 2020, who didn't recognize the legitimacy of Lukashenko. They understand that Lukashenko is a criminal, he committed crimes against Belarusians, he is a war criminal. And he has to be brought to accountability for all the crimes.
But nevertheless, for Lukashenko this meeting is more important than it is for the Americans, because he's seeking legitimacy. He's seeking to show the world that 'Look Americans themselves listen to me, I'm important.' But Americans understand that he's playing on the side of Putin in this game, that he is not an independent player.
What would you like to see President Trump do in Belarus?
We understand that President Trump wants to end the war in Ukraine and this is why Belarus might be a topic for negotiation as well. For us, it's very important that the peace in Ukraine that President Trump wants to achieve must be lasting and just. It must be on the conditions of Ukraine. We can't reward the aggressor. There cannot be peace without justice, and the Belarusian topic is existential here because if Lukashenko stays in power in Belarus, there will no longer be a possibility to secure peace in the whole region.
So we want President Trump to continue first of all releases, but also continue this communication through the State Department with the Belarusian Democratic Forces, and bring changes in Belarus that will actually change the security architecture of the whole region. So, continue this humanitarian track and also push Lukashenko and his regime on their path of national dialogue with Belarusians.
America can play this very strong mediation role between the Belarusians and the regime. Because again, I want to underline that Lukashenko wants negotiations with the USA or with the West, possibly with the European Union, but we need systematic changes. We want Belarusian people to return to Belarus, where they will not be prosecuted. We want to write our constitution so that it works for Belarusian people. The aim is much broader than the release of political prisoners, though that is our priority.
Are you worried that the Trump administration may be giving Putin and Lukashenko too much credit in its bid to end the war? Is it too transactional?
Of course, you know President Trump's politics, we see it is rather transactional. But maybe it's not about credit, it's about giving a chance to Putin, maybe to Lukashenko, to change the situation that will meet the demands of Ukrainians and Belarusians. We already saw that President Trump met President Zelenskyy during the NATO Summit and it was a very pleasant conversation. And I think that there was disappointment in Trump's administration that Putin doesn't want to make any concessions.
What advice do you have for the Trump administration as it embarks on negotiations and attempts to improve relationships with Minsk?
We must not normalize the trafficking of political prisoners, when people are released for some concessions from your side, softening of sanctions or publicity. And then new political prisoners are taken. Lukashenko has to be punished, not rewarded.
What is a realistic path forward for getting Belarus' political prisoners freed with American coordination?
There's a big chance to release all people from prison. But the issue is what the regime wants in return for this. We always say that sanctions are the leverage to release people, but we have to use this leverage smartly. If we don't see any signs that repressions are stopped, this instrument cannot be used.
Because 14 people have been released but [in June], 28 were detained. When we see a change of policy by Lukashenko, that he's ready to stop these repressions and make steps forward toward the Belarusian people, it might be a signal that you can talk about lifting of sanctions. But again, don't, forget that we have more leverage with European sanctions. Of course, the actions have to be coordinated. And there should be no pressure, for example, from the American side to the European side. The main message is that sanctions as instruments have to be used smartly.
We can't even speak about softening sanctions now, while repressions continue and with more than 1,000 behind bars. The first condition — ending repression — must be met. And I am sure President Trump, with all his power, can achieve it. Like the release of my husband — it happened without lifting any sanctions.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Swarms of Russian drones attack Ukraine nightly as Moscow puts new emphasis on the deadly weapon
Swarms of Russian drones attack Ukraine nightly as Moscow puts new emphasis on the deadly weapon

Associated Press

time3 hours ago

  • Associated Press

Swarms of Russian drones attack Ukraine nightly as Moscow puts new emphasis on the deadly weapon

The long-range Russian drones come in swarms each night, buzzing for hours over Ukraine by the hundreds, terrorizing the population and attacking targets from the industrial east to areas near its western border with Poland. Russia now often batters Ukraine with more drones in a single night than it did during some entire months in 2024, and analysts say the barrages are likely to escalate. On July 8, Russia unleashed more than 700 drones — a record. Some experts say that number could soon top 1,000 a day. The spike comes as U.S. President Donald Trump has given Russia until early September to reach a ceasefire or face new sanctions -– a timeframe Moscow is likely to use to inflict as much damage as possible on Ukraine. Russia has sharply increased its drone output and appears to keep ramping it up. Initially importing Shahed drones from Iran early in the 3 1/2-year-old war, Russia has boosted its domestic production and upgraded the original design. The Russian Defense Ministry says it's turning its drone force into a separate military branch. It also has established a dedicated center for improving drone tactics and better training for those flying them. Fighting 'a war of drones' Russian engineers have changed the original Iranian Shahed to increase its altitude and make it harder to intercept, according to Russian military bloggers and Western analysts. Other modifications include making it more jamming-resistant and able to carry powerful thermobaric warheads. Some use artificial intelligence to operate autonomously. The original Shahed and its Russian replica — called 'Geran,' or 'geranium' — have an engine to propel it at 180 kph (just over 110 mph). A faster jet version is reportedly in the works. The Washington-based Institute for the Study of War noted that cooperation with China has allowed Russia to bypass Western sanctions on imports of electronics for drone production. Ukraine's military intelligence estimates that Russia receives up to 65% of components for its Geran drones from China. Beijing rejects the claims. Russia initially launched its production of the Iranian drones at factory in Alabuga, located in Tatarstan. An Associated Press investigation found employees at the Alabuga plant included young African women who said they were duped into taking jobs there. Geran production later began at a plant in Udmurtia, west of the Ural Mountains. Ukraine has launched drone attacks on both factories but failed to derail production. A report Sunday by state-run Zvezda TV described the Alabuga factory as the world's biggest attack drone plant. 'It's a war of drones. We are ready for it,' said plant director Timur Shagivaleyev, adding it produces all components, including engines and electronics, and has its own training school. The report showed hundreds of black Geran drones stacked in an assembly shop decorated with Soviet-style posters. One featured images of the father of the Soviet nuclear bomb, Igor Kurchatov, legendary Soviet space program chief, Sergei Korolyov, and dictator Josef Stalin, with the words: 'Kurchatov, Korolyov and Stalin live in your DNA.' Shifting tactics and defenses The Russian military has improved its tactics, increasingly using decoy drones named 'Gerbera' for a type of daisy. They closely resemble the attack drones and are intended to confuse Ukrainian defenses and distract attention from their more deadly twins. By using large numbers of drones in one attack, Russia seeks to overwhelm Ukrainian air defenses and keep them from targeting more expensive cruise and ballistic missiles that Moscow often uses alongside the drones to hit targets like key infrastructure facilities, air defense batteries and air bases. Former Russian Defense Ministry press officer Mikhail Zvinchuk, who runs a popular war blog, noted the Russian military has learned to focus on a few targets to maximize the impact. The drones can roam Ukraine's skies for hours, zigzagging past defenses, he wrote. 'Our defense industries' output allows massive strikes on practically a daily basis without the need for breaks to accumulate the necessary resources,' said another military blogger, Alexander Kots. 'We no longer spread our fingers but hit with a punching fist in one spot to make sure we hit the targets.' Ukraine relies on mobile teams armed with machine guns as a low-cost response to the drones to spare the use of expensive Western-supplied air defense missiles. It also has developed interceptor drones and is working to scale up production, but the steady rise in Russian attacks is straining its defenses. How Russia affords all those drones Despite international sanctions and a growing load on its economy, Russia's military spending this year has risen 3.4% over 2024, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which estimated it at the equivalent of about $200 billion. While budgetary pressures could increase, it said, the current spending level is manageable for the Kremlin. Over 1.5 million drones of various types were delivered to the military last year, said President Vladimir Putin. Frontelligence Insight, a Ukraine-based open-source intelligence organization, reported this month that Russia launched more than 28,000 Shahed and Geran drones since the full-scale invasion began in 2022, with 10% of the total fired last month alone. While ballistic and cruise missiles are faster and pack a bigger punch, they cost millions and are available only in limited quantities. A Geran drone costs only tens of thousands of dollars — a fraction of a ballistic missile. The drones' range of about 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) allows them to bypass some defenses, and a relatively big load of 40 kilograms (88 pounds) of explosives makes them a highly effective instrument of what the Center for Strategic and International Studies calls 'a cruel attritional logic.' CSIS called them 'the most cost-effective munition in Russia's firepower strike arsenal.' 'Russia's plan is to intimidate our society,' Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, adding that Moscow seeks to launch 700 to 1,000 drones a day. Over the weekend, German Maj. Gen. Christian Freuding said in an interview that Russia aims for a capability of launching 2,000 drones in one attack. Russia could make drone force its own military branch Along the more than 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) front line, short-range attack drones have become prolific and transformed the fighting, quickly spotting and targeting troops and weapons within a 10-kilometer (6-mile) kill zone. Russian drone units initially were set on the initiative of midlevel commanders and often relied on equipment purchased with private donations. Once drones became available in big numbers, the military moved last fall to put those units under a single command. Putin has endorsed the Defense Ministry's proposal to make drones a separate branch of the armed forces, dubbed the Unmanned Systems Troops. Russia has increasingly focused on battlefield drones that use thin fiber optic cables, making them immune to jamming and have an extended range of 25 kilometers (over 15 miles). It also has set up Rubicon, a center to train drone operators and develop the best tactics. Such fiber optic drones used by both sides can venture deeper into rear areas, targeting supply, support and command structures that until recently were deemed safe. Michael Kofman, a military expert with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the Russian advancements have raised new defensive challenges for Ukraine. 'The Ukrainian military has to evolve ways of protecting the rear, entrenching at a much greater depth,' Kofman said in a recent podcast.

Want to ban the burka? Try asking the women like me first
Want to ban the burka? Try asking the women like me first

Yahoo

time15 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Want to ban the burka? Try asking the women like me first

When Sarah Pochin, the Reform MP, recently asked prime minister Keir Starmer whether Britain should follow France, Belgium, and Denmark in banning the burka, my mother - watching the clip beside me - tilted her head and asked, 'What is she saying? 'Burger'?' It wasn't just a mishearing. It was a reminder that in this country, politicians feel entitled to debate our clothing, our faith and our freedom - yet still stumble over the word burka. They discuss what Muslim women wear, but can't pronounce it correctly. It's not burger, and it's not burk-ah. It's boorkah. The very least politicians can do, before legislating our lives, is get the name right. Some might argue that since some Muslim-majority countries have banned the burka - that makes it a legitimate position. Morocco, Tunisia, and others have imposed restrictions, often in the name of modernisation, national unity, or security. Runcorn and Helsby MP Sarah Pochin questioned Keir Starmer in Prime Minister's Questions whether he would follow some European countries lead in banning the burka. — Sky News (@SkyNews) June 5, 2025 But authoritarianism should not be confused with liberation. The outcome is the same: women's agency is erased, and the state decides how we appear in public. That isn't empowerment - it's control, dressed up as reform. In 2015, a white man approached me and asked: 'What colour is your hair under your veil?' I replied: 'It's pink,' but didn't ask him what colour his hair had been before he went bald. That moment stayed with me because it revealed how people feel entitled to interrogate Muslim women. I later wrote a book about that experience, My Hair Is Pink Under This Veil, chronicling my decision to wear the hijab and the questions, assumptions, and aggressions that came with it. The burka, like the hijab, has become a symbol onto which people project their fears, fantasies and frustrations. But behind every veil is a person - thinking, choosing, living. So when politicians like Sarah Pochin suggest banning the burka, they're not just mispronouncing a word, they're speaking for women like me without asking our opinion. Women like me who are voters, writers, public office holders and community builders. Our identities cannot be legislated away and our voices won't be silenced - not by policy, not by prejudice, not by fear. This is discrimination, and it's happening in a country where 61% of young women from racial minorities already report facing bias at work. The debate around Islam, inequality and integration shifts with every headline, political soundbite, crisis or act of violence. Against this backdrop, Muslim women have had to fight to carve out our place in society. How can we speak of integration in a Brexit era when Muslim women are still labelled "submissive" and white men feel emboldened to tear veils from our heads in public? When Muslim girls grow up amid poverty, deprivation, drug abuse and exploitation? When gender-based Islamophobia intensifies under the guise of national cohesion? We must ask what the veil means - not just to Muslim women, but to those who react to it. Is it a personal expression of faith and identity? A misunderstood political symbol? Or a mirror exposing the anxieties of modern Britain? Right-wing and nationalist forces have long exploited the veil as either a symbol of oppression or defiance, and labelled it something to fear. I remember working on the Isle of Dogs in East London when the British National Party had a councillor elected. Combat 18 roamed the streets. A Muslim grocer had a pig's head flung into his shop in broad daylight. There was one estate where I had to support two Bangladeshi families to relocate after repeated hostilities. One mother had her headscarf pulled off while walking her children to school. The racists shouted: "Rights for whites". A local police station had to assign female officers to escort children to Quranic classes. In another case, a white woman filed a complaint against her elderly Muslim neighbour for planting coriander instead of roses in her garden. When I asked if the woman had broken any tenancy rules or caused disturbance, the complainant said no, but insisted: "She's gotta learn to be like us. British." When Boris Johnson made his "letterbox" comment in 2018, several older Muslim women asked me if he owned a hairbrush, and said they'd gladly send him one if not. That same weekend, I was travelling with a group of women when a man let us board the train first. One of the women wearing a niqab was the last to get on. As she stepped through the doors, he laughed and said: 'Hold on, you forgot the letterbox.' He thought it was a joke, just quoting the former prime minister. This is the landscape Muslim women navigate: a Britain where our plants, our clothing, our languages and even our presence are subject to judgment. And still, we show up - as doctors, nurses, teachers, CEOs, activists, artists, engineers, journalists, scientists, academics, councillors, carers and community organisers. Because we believe in a Britain where Muslim women are trusted to define our own visibility - not questioned, not punished and not erased.

Kosovo's Leader Signals End to Deadlock With Possible Coalition
Kosovo's Leader Signals End to Deadlock With Possible Coalition

Bloomberg

time17 hours ago

  • Bloomberg

Kosovo's Leader Signals End to Deadlock With Possible Coalition

Kosovo's prime minister opened the door to a power-sharing agreement with a small opposition party as pressure mounts to break a political deadlock that's left the country without a functioning parliament for nearly four months. 'We've expressed our interest and readiness to co-govern with the Social Democratic Initiative,' Albin Kurti said Monday during a press conference, confirming he made a concrete offer during a weekend meeting. But he said talks are still ongoing, declining to elaborate on details.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store