Indeed, European states are supposed to be 'safe havens' for journalists, exiles and dissidents from authoritarian regimes. Values of political pluralism and freedom of speech, rights-based protection for persons fleeing dangerous situations, together with supposedly neutral law enforcement and migration services are meant, in principle, to protect persons at risk from the long arm of their home country's security services.
But a steady stream of harassment and attacks, extraditions, deportations and kidnappings against those fleeing authoritarian states has put that idea under serious strain in recent years--as well as raising questions about how European states are reacting to transnational repression. The European Union may now have its own version of the Magnitsky Act, which imposes asset freezes and travel bans on individuals and entities suspected of human rights violations, but it is yet to stop repression in EU states. And while the Pratasevich case is clearly unprecedented--grounding an EU plane with EU citizens with a fighter jet is new territory--it points to the huge challenge of how states can respond to these acts.
Earlier this year, for example, an Azerbaijani blogger, Mahammad Mirzali, was beaten and stabbed in broad daylight in Nantes, France--in an attack he connected directly to his criticism of the Azerbaijani authorities. Meanwhile, since March, five Chechen exiles seeking asylum in France and Germany have been deported to Russia, where they face likely torture and fabricated criminal investigations.
"What would the EU be doing if Pratasevich were a prominent French journalist?" asked John Heathershaw, professor of politics at the University of Exeter, who researches how authoritarian states target dissidents abroad.
He pointed to the situation of Sharofiddin Gadoev, a Tajik political refugee and Dutch resident. In February 2019, Gadoev, a businessman and exile, was arrested by Russian officials in Moscow and forced onto a plane to Tajikistan, where he faced politically motivated prosecution.
Several weeks after Gadoev was "rendered" to Tajikistan, Heathershaw noted, the Netherlands "successfully demanded his return"--an example, he says, of "what the European Union should do" in the Pratasevich case.
"More broadly, we need to see recognition that anti-immigrant policies within the EU, encourage countries like Tajikistan and Belarus that they can get away with this without a vehement response," said Heathershaw. "They do it because they see Western countries as weak."
"Protecting those who have already received asylum in Europe, as well as EU citizens, is a minimum task for European countries," said Mojeiko. "If regimes like Lukashenka are able to hijack the planes of European airlines with impunity, then this will also be a signal to Putin and other authoritarian leaders that they can do more in relation to European countries they dislike."
"The EU needs to stop treating Belarus like a state with due process and recognise it as a kleptocracy where a cabal of Lukashenka's people keep control of wealth production, both legal and illegal, through vicious means," said Heathershaw. "If they do not step up with a flight ban to and from Belarus, and for the country's airline, then they will have failed."
More practically, it appears that this dramatic case has not only put Belarus back on the political agenda--it's also become a tragic reminder of the potentially extreme risks that journalists and exiles face even after they leave their homes.
"Expressions of 'deep concern' will not be enough," said Mojeiko. "Real action is necessary."
