“Ha-ha: we’re still here…” Results of the research on the situation of Belarusian youth

27 / Jan.
Analytics, News

In 2025, the Belarusian National Youth Council “RADA”, with the support of the Belarus Beehive 2.0 programme and financial support from the European Union, initiated and conducted the sociological research “Ha-ha, we are still here.” The research made it possible to identify the interests, challenges, and opportunities of young people inside Belarus, their level of awareness of civil society organizations, as well as prevailing migration attitudes.

This research continues a series of previous works by “RADA”. Studies of the situation of youth in Belarus were already conducted in 2019/2020 and in 2022 (“Ha-ha, I Live Here. Analysis of the Situation of Belarusian Youth 2019 – 2022”). The current research is the third in this series. Since 2022, opportunities to conduct independent sociological research inside the country have become even more limited, which has resulted in differences in methodology and has restricted the possibility of direct comparison with previous waves. Nevertheless, wherever possible, the report includes reflection on the changes that have taken place since then.

Three main methods were used for data collection:

An online survey of young people aged 18–34 living in Belarus.
In-depth interviews with 12 representatives of youth living in Belarus.
Interviews with experts — five individuals who were forced to leave the country due to the risk of political repression.

Some key points

Among surveyed youth in Belarus, the number of those not planning to emigrate has increased significantly (from 30% in 2022 to 62% now), and, accordingly, the share of those who would like to leave but do not have the means has decreased (from 28% to 10%).

The study showed that for the majority of young people in Belarus, the main life priorities are financial well-being and close relationships. They mostly spend their free time online, consuming cultural or entertainment content (films, TV series, or music) and psychological content, or meeting with friends.

The internet and social media have become the main source of information and a platform for comparing alternative narratives with state propaganda. At the same time, young people show less interest in global affairs and are more focused on developing their personal practical skills, ranging from time or financial management to the use of professional or artistic tools.

In their interviews, young people repeatedly emphasized the values of self-realization and mental well-being, and also noted that the traditional social hierarchy has lost its significance: “there are no adults anymore.” This reflects their expectation of equal and partnership-based relationships with other generations.

What are young people interested in, and what do they aspire to?

The majority of young people tend to spend their free time consuming media content and interacting with friends and family. The most common activities are watching films and TV series (71%), communicating on social media (66%), listening to music (60%), and meeting with friends (46%). These are followed by part-time work (40%), reading books (34%), sports or physical activity (32%), video gaming (31%), learning or self-development (29%), and creative activities (18%). Volunteering accounted for 3%.

Which topics are of the greatest interest for reading, watching, or discussing?

The main topics that sparked interest for reading, watching, or discussion were films and TV series (62%), music (47%), and psychology and self-knowledge (37%). These were followed by travel and the culture of other countries (33%), sports and a healthy lifestyle (28%), science and technology (26%), education and career (21%), business and finance (19%), fashion and style (19%), as well as art and creativity (18%). Politics and social issues interested 16% of respondents, while topics related to environmental protection or sustainable development attracted 6%.

Values

For the majority of young people in Belarus, well-being and close relationships are the highest priorities in life. At the top were the happiness and health of friends and family (54%), family and relationships (53%), as well as financial well-being and comfort (47%).

Personal freedom and independence (25%), interesting work (20%), and the opportunity to realize one’s potential (19%) were mentioned significantly less often.

However, when respondents were asked to assess what they believe is most important for the majority of people their age, the ranking looked somewhat different: financial well-being came first (52%), followed by personal freedom and independence (34%), family and relationships (33%), and pleasure and entertainment (31%). In this ranking, the happiness and health of friends and family dropped to fifth place (28%).

Thus…

Cultural life in the country has noticeably declined. In Minsk and other cities and towns, fewer high-quality concerts, films, or exhibitions are held that meet the interests of young people. As a result, youth are spending more time at home or with close friends, and the internet has become the dominant channel for consuming cultural content.

The shift in orientation from Western models to Russian ones has become noticeable. In fashion and design, young people are increasingly following Russian trends rather than European ones. For leisure and travel, Russian destinations are becoming preferred over European ones. The academic environment has also severed its ties with international partnerships: collaboration between Belarusian universities and European or other institutions has almost completely stopped and remains limited to the CIS.

A new wave of state investment in “youth work” has taken an explicitly militarized form. Dozens of military-style groups or camps have been established, where young people are taught to handle weapons, wear uniforms, watch parades, and view the army as the highest source of pride. This is accompanied by systematic propaganda portraying the European Union as a symbol of the enemy, contrasting the idea of a union exclusively with Russia.

Finally, today’s youth in Belarus generally refrain from political engagement. For those who directly participated in the events of 2020, this choice is deliberate: an attempt to protect themselves and avoid risks to their personal safety. For those who, due to their age, did not witness these events, political apathy is more of an inherent part of the social environment in which they grew up.

What concerns young people, and where do they feel they have influence?

The most common problems faced by young people are employment and financial well-being: finding attractive and adequately paid work, excessive workloads, or high housing costs. A significant portion of respondents also noted difficulties with education (too much or uninteresting), personal relationships, or mental health.

Experts emphasize that the education system in Belarus is outdated and subject to strong ideological control and repressive practices. Nevertheless, the demand for alternative learning formats, such as online courses or non-formal education, is not always met. The field of mental well-being suffers from the uncertainty of the future, which has become a “new reality” for young people.

Interviews indicate that young people feel limited in their choices and opportunities, while simultaneously seeking pragmatic ways to adapt — ranging from keeping an unfulfilling job for the sake of stability to developing their own projects.

The majority of young people are confident that they can influence their own standard of living (71%) and, to a lesser extent, the well-being of family members or friends (34%). Young people much less often see their potential influence on decision-making by local authorities (11%) or actions of central government structures (6%). At the same time, 13% are convinced that they cannot influence anything, and 10% are unable to answer.

Which forms of youth participation genuinely help address important issues and make their voices heard in Belarus?

The most effective forms are education and skills development (54%), blogging or managing social media and content creation (39%), as well as participation in discussions or decision-making processes concerning youth at various levels (33%). Fewer than a third see effectiveness in voting in elections (26%) or participating in non-governmental organizations or initiatives (22%), as well as in non-formal education, journalism, or business projects related to addressing youth issues (20% each).

Other forms, including participation in broader public discussions, creating one’s own initiatives or organizations, and taking part in advisory councils operating alongside government bodies or within political parties, were mentioned much less frequently.

Compared to 2022, the ranking of popular options remains the same: the leading trio includes education, blogging or social media, and participation in youth-related decision-making processes. The only significant difference is the higher position of non-formal education in this study.

At the same time, questions related to the potential influence of youth on life in the country now provoke noticeable tension. One expert notes:

“Those we work with may not remember 2020, but despite this, they still have a shared understanding of the situation. Something could become dangerous.”

Another trend has emerged due to the widespread perception of instability as the new normal. Young people seem to have grown accustomed to the idea that the future is unpredictable and are therefore less likely to rely on their own actions as a tool for change.

Do young people participate in public life?

The study shows that Belarusian youth are fairly active in public life.

Over the past 12 months, three-quarters of respondents have participated in at least one of the listed activities related to helping others or have taken part in organizational events.

The most common form of assistance was providing financial support to acquaintances in difficult situations (43%), donating money or items to charitable or non-governmental organizations (24%), as well as personally giving items to acquaintances facing challenging circumstances (20%).

Which civil society organizations are known to Belarusian youth?

It is noteworthy that, despite a relatively high percentage of respondents indicating “human rights protection” as an area of activity in which they know civil society organizations, no human rights organizations appear among the most popular names. Only six individuals mentioned them directly (Viasna Human Rights Centre, Belarusian Helsinki Committee, Belarusian Association of Journalists), while another two simply wrote “human rights protection.” At least two entirely different reasons may underlie this.

Firstly, as shown by the results of another 2024 study, human rights activities are often confused with law enforcement, so there is a likelihood that at least part of the overall percentage actually refers to the police.

Secondly, the human rights sector in Belarus has operated under repressive conditions for many years, even before 2020. Therefore, mentioning the relevant organizations may have been perceived by respondents as dangerous.

The results indicate that the trend of helping others is still observed. However, assistance now more often takes a “hand-to-hand” form (primarily among acquaintances) or occurs in sectors perceived as safe, i.e., well distanced from politics.

A concerning trend is that the government proactively supports organizations loyal to the current authorities. Not all young people are able to discern who is behind a particular organization or where they could realize their potential in helping others. The same applies to other youth associations based on interests.

In other words, compared to previous years, opportunities for civic engagement have decreased, and young people are forced to seek new, safer forms of participation, which most often means limiting contact with acquaintances or joining initiatives sanctioned by the government.

Where do young people plan to live in the future?

Firstly, the number of those not planning to emigrate has increased significantly (from 30% in 2022 to 62% now), and, accordingly, the share of those who would like to leave but do not have the means has decreased (from 28% to 10%).

Secondly, among the reasons for emigration, interest in other countries is now significantly higher (34% compared to 46%), while the lack of opportunities in Belarus is mentioned much less frequently (48% compared to 30%), as is the feeling of danger (41% compared to 31%). This may indicate that the element of necessity in emigration motivation is slightly decreasing, being offset by elements of personal curiosity and the desire for self-development.

Among the obstacles to migration, the share of those citing a lack of determination or energy has increased (21% compared to 33%), as well as insufficient knowledge of other countries or their cultures (14% compared to 23%). Other barriers, including financial constraints or family obligations, remain at the previous level.

The media space is full of propaganda materials about the hardships of life in Europe, which does not encourage the desire to emigrate. Additionally, some respondents note processes of “normalization” in the country: for many people, life has returned to a relatively familiar state after 2020.

Recommendations from experts

How to engage with youth:

Include young people in teams and allow their voices to be heard in organizational communication.

Avoid triggering words and topics. Instead of “human rights” or “dictatorship,” it is better to use concepts such as “social projects,” “urban studies,” or “urban ecology.” Open references to politics, war, and 2020 should be avoided, as these are perceived by youth as “emigrant content.”

Develop communities — for example, alumni clubs of educational programs that maintain connections and build networks of trust.

Promote offline networking. Safe in-person meetings are especially valuable for building trust.

Using available opportunities to cooperate with the universities. Despite limitations, individual situations enable collaboration even through the entities loyal to the government (for example, the BRSM).

Download the study in English
Download the study in Belarusian