Joerg Forbrig is senior fellow and director for Central and Eastern Europe at the German Marshall Fund of the United States think tank.

On the surface, the political repression and police violence ripping through Belarus is nothing out of the ordinary under President Aleksander Lukashenko’s regime. Brutal treatment of dissenters has typically paved the way to previous fraudulent elections in Belarus, where the strongman has ruled since 1994.

But there’s something different about the crackdown that has taken place in the past couple of months. This time, it’s a signal that Lukashenko’s regime is nervous. As the country prepares for the upcoming August election, Belarus’ repressive rulers rightly sense that the sands on which they have been standing are shifting.

Since early May, more than 650 peaceful protesters, journalists and civic activists have been detained across the country for protesting against the Belarus strongman. The situation is increasingly explosive — and, given it is happening on Europe’s doorstep, one the EU needs to pay close attention to.

Belarus is in crisis on multiple fronts.

Lukashenko supporters — typically less qualified, provincial and elderly Belarusians — are finding it ever harder to make ends meet.

Earlier this year, Russia suspended oil and gas supplies to Belarus, opening up an economic abyss in a country already drained by years of stagnation and recession. What used to be a Russian subsidy amounting to one-fifth of Belarusian GDP has now become a tool used by the Kremlin to push Minsk toward deeper political integration with Moscow.

Rejecting such demands out of self-preservation, Lukashenko has desperately sought oil and funds elsewhere, but the regime’s modest financial reserves are dwindling.

Then came COVID-19. Out of fear for his already battered economy, Lukashenko has flatly denied the severity of the pandemic — and other than suggesting vodka and sauna as remedies, he has abandoned his people to their fate.

In a remarkable demonstration of self-organization and autonomy, the Belarusian people adopted preventive measures and supported, through numerous civic initiatives across the country, medical workers and vulnerable groups with donations and supplies.

These twin crises have turned the public against Lukashenko at a delicate time for the regime.

For years, a mix of genuine support among some and passivity among others provided the strongman with sufficient backing to continue to rule. That base is now crumbling.

Lukashenko supporters — typically less qualified, provincial and elderly Belarusians — are finding it ever harder to make ends meet. Previously apolitical citizens are becoming increasingly active as a result of their disillusionment with their eternal leader, concerns about Belarusian independence from Moscow, and the regime’s inept handling of COVID-19.

Official figures put Lukashenko’s approval rating at about one-third of the population. Independent observers say it is likely to be half that number.

To make matters worse, Belarus’ propaganda machine is faltering. Searches for reliable information on the virus have spiked during the pandemic, and people are increasingly looking beyond official channels for coverage of the election campaign. More and more, Belarusians are turning to social media, independent journalists, bloggers and civic activists.

As an ever-larger proportion of Belarusian voters exit the regime’s official indoctrination thanks to online media, Lukashenko is also bleeding support among the elite and technocrats typically loyal to the regime.

Many have long acknowledged the need for economic reform. Now, they feel that time is running out to avert utter economic collapse.

Local administration officials, health care and social workers, and university and school teachers are increasingly vocal in their dissatisfaction with Lukashenko’s non-handling of the COVID-19 crisis. Journalists from state media and famous athletes are speaking out critically. Even police officers and security personnel have shown dismay over the current crackdown against protesters.

The establishment’s increasing disillusionment with Lukashenko was already apparent in the emergence of political challengers ahead of the election.

For the first time in decades, the elite itself is fielding contenders: Viktar Babaryka, a high-profile banker, and Valery Tsepkalo, a former diplomat and manager of a technology park. Both command considerable support, not only among technocrats and the business elite, but among Belarus’ urban, educated population more broadly.

The blogger and activist Syarhey Tsikhanouski, meanwhile, has made inroads into Lukashenko’s core electorate in the regions. Traveling across the country, he has given voice to the hardship and grievances of rural and small-town folk who feel abandoned by Minsk.

All three are enjoying hitherto unseen levels of support from Belarusian citizens, and have overtaken Lukashenko in the polls. Not surprisingly, Lukashenko has already had Babaryka and Tsikhanouski arrested, hoping to end their candidacies.

The country has entered new, and extremely risky, territory.

Ultimately, it should be the Belarusian people who determine their country’s direction. And Europe should let it be known that it is watching closely.

The Lukashenko regime is clearly preparing to defend its grip on power using all available means. It has reshuffled the government to strengthen the security forces. It is training its riot police to squash all dissent before and after the election. Its propaganda machine has gone into overdrive, variously accusing Russia or the West for attempting to oust Lukashenko.

The regime may well succeed in brutally holding onto power — a scenario that would likely involve an escalation of violence, enraging peaceful protesters and destabilizing the regime, and could even provoke an intervention by Russia.

An alternative to that dramatic and destructive scenario is still possible. It would require Lukashenko and his inner circle to acknowledge that their rule has run its course.

Whether they determine that’s a necessary step will also depend on how the EU responds to developments in Belarus.

The bloc should make it crystal clear that further engagement and cooperation with Minsk is conditional upon an immediate cessation of its brutal crackdown. It should also be ready to consider a freeze of political relations and potential sanctions if Lukashenko does not change course.

Ultimately, it should be the Belarusian people who determine their country’s direction. And Europe should let it be known that it is watching closely.