Belarus directly annexed to the Russian federation around 2000.

After the breakup of the Soviet Union, and even before, there was considerable idea to combine Belarus and Russia. OTL this idea has progressed very slowly, but with different politicians in power it might have succeeded.

Belarus hoped to become nearly an equal partner in a union de jure, but they might well have just ended up another semi autonomous russian subject.

How plausible is this? Is 2000 too soon?

How much would this change affect its surroundings? The baltic states and Poland would presumably be even more pro-NATO. Would we see an earlier western shift for Ukraine?

How would Belarusian demographics continue to change into 2016? Most Belarusians today are ethnically belarusian, and identify as such, but speak russian. I suspect the population will continue to russify over time. Does anyone have an idea as to the rate this has occurred historically and is likely to occur ITTL?
 

Cook

Banned
Most Belarusians today are ethnically belarusian, and identify as such, but speak russian. I suspect the population will continue to russify over time.

Most Irish speak English, but remain Irish; most Americans likewise Speak English, and of course there are multiple other examples. The point: speaking Russian does not make you Russian, despite Putin's fantasies. So no, Belarus is not Russifying.
 
Most Irish speak English, but remain Irish; most Americans likewise Speak English, and of course there are multiple other examples. The point: speaking Russian does not make you Russian, despite Putin's fantasies. So no, Belarus is not Russifying.

Presumably around 0% of people in the modern day area of Belarus, circa 1000 AD, spoke russian, or considered themselves russian. Today the numbers are around 70% and 10%. Russification has happened historically. It may have stopped after Belarusian independence in 1991, or earlier or later, I don't know. I suspect that if Belarus was annexed to Russia, then russian would be the most convenient language for belarusians to conduct business in, and the language of law, schooling, etc. This doesn't mean that all or even most belarusians would suddenly forget their belarusianess, but maybe 15% instead of 10% would consider themselves russian, and maybe 75% instead of 70% would use russian as their first language.

As a comparison to Ireland, which I can more easily find information on; circa 1000 AD a negligible percent of people on that island spoke English as their first language, by 1850 about 75% did, today in independent Ireland about 94% speak English first, while in northern Ireland closer to 99% do.
 
After the breakup of the Soviet Union, and even before, there was considerable idea to combine Belarus and Russia. OTL this idea has progressed very slowly, but with different politicians in power it might have succeeded.

Belarus hoped to become nearly an equal partner in a union de jure, but they might well have just ended up another semi autonomous russian subject.

How plausible is this? Is 2000 too soon?

How much would this change affect its surroundings? The baltic states and Poland would presumably be even more pro-NATO. Would we see an earlier western shift for Ukraine?

How would Belarusian demographics continue to change into 2016? Most Belarusians today are ethnically belarusian, and identify as such, but speak russian. I suspect the population will continue to russify over time. Does anyone have an idea as to the rate this has occurred historically and is likely to occur ITTL?

Its possible, certainly. The main obstacle, as far as I understand it, was Putin. The arrangement and status Belarus/Lukashenka wanted was loosely similar to the one in the Soviet Union. Putin for all his playing to Soviet nostalgia has never been interested in that (he counter offered the AO status you mentioned). A different candidate (Primakov?) might be more receptive. The cultural differences between Russia and Belarus are slight, but for a number of reasons I doubt Lukashenka would accept anything less than nominally equal status. And I don't know that anyone other than Lukashenka would go for union in the first place. Unless it's by force (a huge gamble given the state of Russia in 2000) I don't see a direct annexation happening. Having the so-called Union State amount to something is more likely.

Assuming that a union did happen in some way, its almost guaranteed to be received poorly by Russia's neighbors. It wouldn't make the Baltics more pro-NATO only because they were passionately pro NATO to begin with. It'd also make them much more vulnerable to a Russian invasion and the debate over their membership would probably be a little more intense. Still, its the early 2000s, and Russia is still pretty weak and, in this scenario, actively expanding (no matter what the Union is going to be seen as Anschluss II). So I think their membership is likely. In Ukraine the east vs west debate itself would become obvious earlier, which in itself favors Russia-less time for opposition to build a narrative, brush up on Ukrainian, etc. Geopolitically Russia now borders Ukraine on 3 sides, and economically Russia & Belarus are much better off than Ukraine-as in OTL. But the choice presented will probably tilt Ukraine towards NATO-independence in the west vs constituent republic or less of the Union State/Russia. And the prospect of Ukraine joining Russia will increase western incentives for Kiev.
 

Anderman

Donor
It is hard to see how Belarus with a population of about 9 million can be on equal terms with the Russian Federation with a population of about 143 million.
 
Everything depends on how Belarus goes for this. At the very least, you would have to make Belarusians invested in the idea of no longer being an independent state, of becoming a sort of autonomous Slavic Tatarstan within the Russian Federation.

This will be very difficult to make happen. A close relationship, yes, that's entirely plausible. Abandoning the undeniable advantages of independent statehood for a more fragile and limited autonomy within the Russian Federation is not a good trade. There's good reason for Lukashenko, and other political figures in Belarus who have traditionally favoured a Russian alliance, to also favour formal independence.
 
Top