Gray Cat Blogger Revealed Who "leaked" The Revolution In 2020

• 9.12.2025, 8:16

The Belarusians turned out to be braver and more principled than Tikhanovskaya and her office.

The interview of former political prisoner and well-known blogger Dmitry Kozlov ("Gray Cat"), in which he talks about the real leaders of the Belarusian opposition, caused a strong reaction on the Web.

The blogger on his page in "Facebook" reveals who he believes is responsible for the defeat of the revolution in 2020:

- A lot of comments and messages have appeared, in which people and bots are asking for explanations of various kinds, trying to dispute the statements I made in this fragment. Once again, everyone is entitled to their personal opinion, and I have expressed mine, and that is the essence of free speech, which we fought for until 2020 and will continue to fight for now.

If you are outside Belarus, subscribe to the YouTube channel of the blogger "Gray Cat"

And now let's get down to business.

The first issue I want to deal with has to do with Tihanovska's accusations of 2020 failure. I'll state it right away - I don't believe that she alone is to blame for 2020's defeat, but it was her decisions as the symbolic leader of the protest and her staff that, in my (and not only) opinion, led to strategic errors and the fact that a 100% winnable situation was completely missed and ended up where we are now.

1) Tikhanovskaya took KGB money, recorded a demotivating video calling for no protests, and left Belarus at the most important moment.

Some might argue that "she is not a professional politician, a weak woman, who has a family, children and husband held hostage by the regime," and "she was broken and intimidated" by the security services.

First of all, if you call yourself a leader, you automatically take full responsibility for the protest and those who participate in it, as well as its consequences - whether it is a defeat or a victory. Everyone should be in their place and do their best to achieve their goals. As for her family, Tihanovska's children had long ago been safe in the EU at the time of the election, with the help of Charter'97 editor-in-chief Natalya Radina (she helped evacuate the children during the coronavirus when the borders were closed, rented an apartment in Vilnius for the first time with her own money, negotiated with Lithuanian politicians who did not trust Tihanovska). As for Siarhei, he is a fighter, a hero and withstood with dignity more than five years of Lukashenka's prisons. It is very doubtful and even a little bit mean to try to use his imprisonment to justify your own mistakes.

Secondly, the video published some time ago about the process of communicating with the head of the UAC, receiving money and "expulsion" of Tikhanovskaya to Lithuania, shows that there was no coercion and threats, as well as forced expulsion. All this looks more like a capitulation deal and a conscious betrayal of the common cause and the people who believed such a "leader". However, contrary to the regime's expectations, the Belarusians turned out to be much braver and more principled than their candidate, not giving in to the provocation.

Thirdly, having already found herself safely outside Belarus, she was in no hurry to refute what she had said earlier and give explanations. Most importantly, she did not declare herself president-elect, which was expected by millions of Belarusians who voted for her. At the very moment when the scales began to tilt towards the people, and the vertical shook and Lukashenko was hysterical, Tikhanovskaya did not raise the power lying on the ground and waiting to be taken (for the first time Tikhanovskaya called herself the elected president only on November 14, 2022).

She hesitantly urged people to take to the streets only a few days later and then only on weekends. For the rest of the week, the Belarusians, as if nothing had happened, were supposed to work for the regime, finance it and sit quietly at home, staying in their comfort zone, thus doing no harm to the system. Friends, are you serious? Dictatorial regimes are not fought this way - the examples of Ukraine, Georgia, Serbia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Romania will help you. Learn the match.

Even when on August 16, at least 0.5 million people came out to the most massive protest action across the country, people were taken away from the center of Minsk. No strategically important administrative buildings were occupied, no roads and railroad tracks were blocked, no stationary protest camp was set up and, I emphasize, there was no call for a nationwide strike. In fact, it should have been voiced much earlier - immediately after the detention of Serhiy Tikhanovsky, Nikolai Statkevich, Viktor Babariko, in the extreme case - on the eve of the elections. I should note that all these initiatives were repeatedly voiced by many politicians, public figures and protesters, but they were always firmly suppressed by the headquarters.

We heard a direct call for strikes only on August 21 (before that they were only approved by Tikhanovska, but she herself did not call for them). Under such conditions, the wavering vertical quickly oriented itself, as did Putin, who was undecided in the first two or three weeks.

On the one hand - a brutal dictator, coming out with a machine gun and arming even his youngest son, showing with all his appearance that he will hold on to power with blue fingers until his last breath (and cover for those scoundrels who will support him in this), and on the other hand - Tikhanovskaya's indecisive, cowardly staff, unwilling to do what it should do and afraid to take power.

Siloviki of various ranks and different ranks contacted some of the protest leaders and offered not only their help, but also asked who should be sworn in. They were ready to come over to the side of the people. But there was no one to swear in, because, once again, Tihanovska did not declare herself president. There was no legitimate head of state at that time. There was no one to give them orders, and law enforcers are military men, they are trained so that they are not accustomed to decide for themselves, they need someone who will give orders.

A separate word should be said about the movements of the columns of protesters - more precisely, about the fact that they were partially led by people who were not in Belarus and either had a poor idea of the real route, or (most likely) deliberately led people into dead ends, bottlenecks, taking them away from the center of the capital. The fact that one of such people was the infamous Roman Protasevich speaks volumes.

Another important negative moment in the work of Tikhanovskaya's headquarters is the removal of the ideological team of fighters against the regime and their replacement by political adventurers, former Lukashenko officials and all sorts of agents, which gradually led us to where we are now - into a deep political crisis. This smoothly brings us to the next question.

2) The second reason for distrusting Tikhanovskaya and her office is the absence of more or less tangible results of their work.

What can be considered here as a result and in what is it measured? Let's start with what Tikhanovska herself states as her goals and states it on her official website. So, the "Our Mission" section. Let's look, and what do we see there? Statements such as "To ensure that National Leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya works to protect the interests and rights of the citizens of Belarus." In 2020, the Belarusians really united around Tikhanovska as a symbol of protests against election fraud and the elected president, but having largely contributed to the failure of 2020, besides not holding the inauguration, she lost this function. Besides, the president in Belarus is not elected for a life term (or have we already adopted the methods of the usurper here too?).

The subparagraph about the presentation of Belarus and Belarusians in relations with other states and international organizations, as well as the fact that "the office provides representation and promotion of the interests of Belarusians and Belarus both inside and outside the country" simply does not stand up to any criticism, since the office does not influence the situation inside the country in any way. And this is one of the reasons why the U.S. and the West as a whole return to negotiations with Lukashenko as a partner. Separately, I would like to remind about Tikhanovsky's promise of support to every officer and policeman in Belarus, who would refuse to fulfill the criminal orders of the dictator and remain faithful to the law. How many of them were subsequently fired and convicted for truth and firmness, which of them she protected and helped? How does she help hundreds of Belarusians, who every year are deported from Poland and Lithuania back to the clutches of the regime? How did she help, for example, the same Veremeichik?

There is no question of any consolidation of democratic forces now - on the contrary, we see constantly growing fragmentation, caused by the very "work" of the office. So we come to the next question.

3) The activity of Tihanouskaya's Office has alienated many people from politics.

This concerns both ordinary Belarusians and some political professionals, who have either become disappointed in Belarusian politics in general, or have simply withdrawn temporarily into the shadows, as they do not see opportunities to actually do something and influence the management of any processes, to promote their ideas and initiatives, do not receive answers to constructive criticism, do not see any results of political activity at all, but only promises, This is how trust is lost and solidarity and horizontal ties are destroyed. You don't have to go far - just look at how many people went out to political actions in Lithuania and Poland in 2021-2022 and how many now. Why? Because people do not see the results of their activities, but they see intrigues, scandals and idle chatter.

The last question I was asked to answer today is why, when listing those whom I consider to be the leaders of the opposition, I mentioned Natalia Radina. Natalia Radina is the editor-in-chief of the largest and most popular opposition news portal Charter'97, a site that has been publishing news without censorship for almost 30 years, criticizes Lukashenko, and has never called him president, as some independent media still do.

By the way, the book Yuri Felshtinsky "Natalia Radina's Belarus" was recently published. There you will find not only all the information about her, but also answers to questions about the history of the struggle against dictatorship in Belarus for the last 30 years.

As for the financing of "Charter'97", this information is absolutely open and transparent - it is indicated on every page of the site, as well as in the book I mentioned above. But Svetlana Tikhanovskaya's office can't boast of this.

Friends and foes, I am waiting for your questions and comments, and I promise that there will be a continuation.