This paper aims to examine Belarus and explain why the country has failed to democratize during the period of 2008-2017, but also if there has been any tendency for democratization during this period. The study is conducted through an analysis of underlying and significant factors for initiating the actual democratization process. The factors analysed are internal, external and regional factors. The method that was applied to this study was a case study were theories of democratization were used to analyse Belarus's democratic development and tendencies towards democracy. The study points out that all factors did play a role in the Belarusian democracy development and tendencies for democratization did exist. Belarus has failed to fully democratize as the regime successfully centralizes the power which is controlled through different means and strategies but there has been a tendency for democratization. The tendency for democratization has been through internal factors as there is an existing middle class and there is an existing critical opposition. For the external factors, a tendency has been shown by the snowball effect, as there have been geographically close demonstrations and democratization, and finally for the regional factors, tendencies for democracy could be identified as there is a desire for a return to the west among the population of Belarus.

This study aims to utilize Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan's (1996) theory of democratic consolidation with its five interactive arenas to comprehend how the Belarusian dictatorship consolidated during the 1990s. A crucial aspect to achieve this aim is to ascertain whether the theory can provide clarity on when autocratic consolidation has occurred, or if it rather elucidates the process of autocratization in Belarus. The paper adopts a descriptive qualitative case study methodology with a deductive approach. By flipping the theory's perspective and examining how the regime undermined the arenas to strengthen autocracy, the study reveals the extent to which Belarus fulfills Linz and Stepan's (1996) three criteria of behavioral, attitudinal, and constitutional consolidation to gain insights into the consolidation of the Belarusian dictatorship. The findings reveal that the Lukashenko-led Belarusian regime systematically eroded aspects across all five arenas to consolidate its dictatorship. However, given the unascertainable attitudinal consolidation that transpired in Belarus during the 1990s, the study cannot pinpoint when autocratic consolidation occurred. Instead, it concludes that an autocratization process began under Lukashenko's rule, facilitated by political, social, legal, institutional, and economic maneuvers aimed at consolidating power. Taken together, the results deepen our understanding of what strategies autocratic regimes may employ to strengthen autocracy.

The purpose of the paper is to study whether there are any democratic tendencies in Belarus. The question that the paper intends to answer is, are there any signs of democracy in Belarus. The paper is based on a qualitative case study where the paper is assessed with Juan J Linz and Alfred Stepans (1996) theory about five interactive arenas where they explain how a democracy is consolidated. The five arenas are Civil society, Political society, Rule of law, State apparatus and Economic society. Regarding the result, this study has shown that Belarus has a very low grade of democracy tendencies in every arena and much of that because the president Aleksandr Lukasjenko’s undemocratic authoritarian regime. Only in the economic arena there are some small democracy tendencies. The conclusion is that Belarus won’t make required democratic changes as long as Lukasjenko rules the country.