What has Lukashenko repeatedly warned West and international community about

The sustainable development of any country is impossible without peace and security.

These words were spoken by the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko back in 2015. Speaking at the UN summit in New York, the head of state called for dialogue among countries. The President emphasized that if bloodshed and fratricidal slaughter in Europe are not stopped and the escalation of conflict is allowed, the entire civilized world will be in trouble. And what is happening today? Why does Belarus cherish peace, and not only on its own land, what have the Belarusian authorities been calling for year after year to the international community, and what idea, despite its seeming naivety, has Alexander Lukashenko not abandoned to this day? We answer these questions in a new episode of the BELTA YouTube project "As a Matter of Fact: The President's Decisions".

How Belarus Called for Peace Negotiations

Let's go back a few years. In 2017, at the annual session of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, Alexander Lukashenko advocated for strengthening confidence-building measures and cooperation in Europe. The head of state then put forward the idea of launching a new international dialogue on security issues, similar to the Helsinki process.

In 2018, first at a meeting with the Special Representative of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly for Eastern Europe, and a couple of months later at negotiations with the Secretary General of the organization and at an international expert conference, the President again proposed that countries sit down at the negotiating table and do something to reduce the tension in Europe. This thesis was also voiced at the end of the year at a meeting of the Munich Security Conference core group. In 2019, Alexander Lukashenko continued to call on states to negotiate. At the international conference on European security, he again voiced proposals for the gradual de-escalation of tensions and conflict resolution. In just a few minutes, Russia and NATO, the President warned, could go from an unintentional local conflict to nuclear war.

"Belarus, like no one else, knows the price of peace. We lost more than three million people during the Second World War, experienced genocide, and especially value stability, tranquility, and peace on our land," noted Chairman of the Standing Commission on International Affairs and National Security of the Council of the Republic Sergei Rachkov. "Today, we understand that security must be indivisible. There cannot be certain conditions for one country to ensure security and some other conditions for other countries. Therefore, today we are talking about the indivisibility of security."

The parliamentarian recalled that another important initiative of Belarus was the proposal to form a so-called digital belt of good neighborliness. "This topic remains relevant and pressing. Today, many countries are subjected to information influence, even information aggression. Social networks are used, disinformation and fakes are spread," said the senator. "On the one hand, we continue to work on creating a system that ensures Belarus's security in the sphere of information. On the other hand, we understand that this issue must be addressed jointly with other countries and international organizations."

Why Lukashenko Flew to Yugoslavia in 1999

We are accustomed to thinking that Belarus began to offer peace initiatives only after the crisis broke out in neighboring Ukraine in 2014. This is not entirely true. Although Belarus was indeed ready to contribute to resolving this crisis and even take responsibility for peace in the eastern regions of Ukraine, ensure control over the Russian-Ukrainian border, and accompany the elections in Donbas. But, apparently, this interfered with someone's plans.

"We do not want to find ourselves on the line of a new civilizational divide, at the sharp end of bloc confrontation between East and West – that is the main thing. Belarusians, better than anyone, know what this can lead to. With the escalation of confrontation, we are predicted the fate of a buffer, or a "bastion," between Russia and NATO. Both experts and politicians are talking about this," stated Alexander Lukashenko in 2018 at a meeting of the main group of the Munich Security Conference in Minsk. - On the one hand, this is bad. But on the other hand, if the powers that be had reached an agreement not to drag Eastern European countries into various military-political blocs, not to demand confirmation of loyalty to the detriment of their sovereign interests, this region would have become a cross-border zone of stability and cooperation."

Shall we look even further? In 1999, the head of state visited Yugoslavia, which was then subjected to constant bombings by NATO. Which still existed then. On the eve of his departure, the President announced that he was going to Belgrade with the hope of solving at least part of the problems and bringing about the resolution of the Yugoslav crisis. But even then, the unipolar world had other plans. With all the ensuing consequences: the prosperous Yugoslavia eventually disappeared from the map of Europe.

In parallel, long-suffering Afghanistan turned into a hotbed of conflicts and drug trafficking. And the bloody slaughter in Iraq did not subside for many years. In 2005, Alexander Lukashenko, from the UN rostrum, recalling all these facts, emphasized: Belarus wants little – peace and stability, Belarusians will achieve everything else themselves. And a little earlier, in an adjacent hall, maps and diagrams with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were being shown. Thus, the American coalition tried to justify its invasion of this country. And where is this weapon? There is still no answer to this question.

Short-term interests instead of points of contact

The Permanent Representative of Belarus to the UN Office in Geneva, Larisa Belskaya, emphasized that the logic guiding Western partners today ignores the real balance of power and the interests of countries not belonging to the North Atlantic Alliance. "It leads and has already actually led to the breakdown of disarmament mechanisms and agreements, to the destruction of trust," the diplomat stated.

"Unfortunately, recently the spread of Western institutions has been viewed by a number of countries as the only possible way to develop the security system. Belarus has different approaches, a different view. And we talk about this in our peace initiatives, constantly and consistently. We do not agree that the more NATO and its military infrastructure in Europe, including near the borders of Belarus, the more security there is. This is not true. Therefore, all of Belarus's peace initiatives are aimed at dialogue between the main players," said Larisa Belskaya.

By the way, an interesting fact. The UN Conference on Disarmament in February 2022 established six subsidiary bodies to develop practical security solutions. A representative of the Permanent Mission of Belarus headed one of these bodies. Under his leadership, experts managed to prepare and agree on the necessary solutions. "Out of these six bodies, only two received such documents. Although not everything is so simple now. All the others could not even come to any basis," noted Larisa Belskaya.

She noted that the current geopolitical situation forces Western politicians to be guided by their immediate interests and not to seek common ground with representatives of other countries.

What "in the spirit of San Francisco" means

Today, given the new circumstances, the "Helsinki-style" negotiation process is no longer sufficient, Belarus believes. Last year, a message from Alexander Lukashenko was sent to the UN Secretary-General. The head of state emphasized that the time has come not even for "Helsinki-2," but for a truly global and defining process involving all leading international players in the spirit of San Francisco.

Helsinki… San Francisco… What do politicians mean when they mention these cities? In 1945, representatives of fifty countries gathered in San Francisco. After lengthy negotiations, they agreed on the Charter of the United Nations. A few months later, the new international organization became a reality. It was the result of four years of work and many years of aspirations. The UN was intended to promote the triumph of peace and justice and the advent of a better life for all humanity.

The conference in San Francisco was attended by 850 delegates, and together with their advisors, delegation staff, and the conference secretariat, the total number of participants reached three and a half thousand. Add to this more than two and a half thousand representatives of the press, radio, and newsreels, as well as observers from various societies and organizations. It was a truly global event. Not only one of the most important in history, but, in all likelihood, also the largest of all international gatherings ever held.

Negotiations in Finland were also significant for the world community, although far less extensive. In 1975, the Helsinki Accords were signed following the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. This helped to reduce the tensions of the Cold War. The "Helsinki Decalogue" - the so-called 10 Commandments - are not legally binding, but they form the basis of political commitments and principles, including the non-use of force and the inviolability of borders, which are key elements of security in Europe.

"I hate war. And our Belarusians hate war"

"We have already begun to sound the alarm, calling for an end to the confrontation. Recently, we have been talking a lot about the need for dialogue, strengthening confidence-building measures, and seeking compromises. But the world, unfortunately, is not getting any better. Trade wars and sanctions confrontation are gaining momentum. The struggle for energy and raw materials is intensifying. Numerous armed and frozen conflicts in the Middle East, Asia, Latin America, and Europe remain unresolved. The system of military-political checks and balances is falling apart before our eyes, and international organizations are currently unable to stop this process. Perhaps they don't want to. Or perhaps those who dominate these organizations are interested in it. Humanity is moving by leaps and bounds towards a precipice," Alexander Lukashenko warned in 2019.

So why did Belarus start sounding the alarm, calling on the international community to stop the confrontation? It's simple: the history of our country is steeped in tragic memories, and the words "if only there were no war," which the younger generation sometimes laughs at, still remain relevant. You see it for yourselves. That is why Belarusians cherish peace. Not only on their own land but also on a regional and global scale.

"I hate war. And our Belarusians hate war. We do not want war. We want peace negotiations. But you are holding Volodya Zelensky by his arms and legs and not letting him to the negotiating table. This is my conviction, and there have been many facts that speak about it. This means you want war. We want peace! Do you hear, Americans? We want peace. Give the command to Zelensky and sit down at the negotiating table with Putin yourselves, and I will sit next to you," the President said at the beginning of this year during an interview with foreign journalists.

Why the West Imposes Sanctions

Recent events increasingly lead to another thought. The West has been testing new weapons for a long time and as a result realized that they are no less effective than artificially creating conflicts and destroying states under the banner of fighting for "democracy" and "human rights." We are talking about... sanctions. For the European Union, punishing someone has recently become an obsessive idea and an urgent necessity.

Here is a fresh example. In the Official Journal of the EU of May 2, documents were published that provide a legal basis for imposing sanctions against individuals "involved in destabilizing the situation in the Republic of Moldova." Umm... What? Well, let's not argue: attempts to overthrow the constitutional system, support for destructive demonstrations and acts of violence should be punished in any country. But for this, there is the government, law enforcement agencies, and relevant laws. Not European sanctions based on arbitrarily compiled lists and registers.

And didn't the EU provide refuge to individuals who in 2020 tried to destabilize and overthrow the constitutional system in Belarus, participated in and supported destructive demonstrations, pushed their supporters to open violence against law enforcement officers and, in general, people in uniform? And for some reason, it is not they, hiding from justice in Vilnius, Warsaw, and other cities, who have become the object of European sanctions, but, on the contrary, representatives of the state and Belarus itself - its entire people.

Larisa Belskaya noted that sanctions are, first and foremost, a mechanism that Western states use to promote certain rules of the game in international politics, the so-called rules-based order.

"After the adoption of the UN Charter, the conclusion of many international treaties, conventions, agreements, and resolutions of the General Assembly, a set of rules of conduct has been formed, which constitute international law. And Western partners say that there are certain rules of conduct that are not norms of international law, but are allegedly legally binding on all states. Whoever acts against the will of the West is instantly, groundlessly declared a human rights violator, and the West declares its right to punish the violator. How? With sanctions," the diplomat said.

Resources - Like a Candy

But why are sanctions a weapon? Just look. The international community is concerned about the problems of hunger and poverty in the world. But how can they be eliminated when all resources are spent on military confrontation, and the imposed bans undermine global food security. So, can sanctions kill?

Another interesting fact. This year, on the sidelines of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, an event was held in honor of the 35th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development. Its basic principles, such as self-determination, economic and social progress, a higher standard of living, participation, involvement, equality, and non-discrimination, are enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.

"The paradox is that Western countries, European countries, the United States, Canada do not recognize the right to development and vote against resolutions that say that countries should be given the opportunity to develop, they should be helped to develop, they should share resources and technologies with them," said Larisa Belskaya. - Unfortunately, this problem in the UN is long-term and has not been resolved yet. This hypocrisy and duplicity shows that the powers that be do not want to share either technologies or resources, but simply want to manipulate weak or developing, not strong enough states in their own interests. Resources are like a candy - here it is, and now it's gone."

Overall, wherever you look, it feels like world leaders are not interested in peace itself. Meanwhile, the leadership of Belarus continues to call on the parties to conflicts, wherever they may erupt, and geopolitical players to engage in peace negotiations. Is a large-scale negotiation process merely a utopia? Or must a global catastrophe that claims millions of lives occur for Belarus to finally be heard? We do not have answers to these questions. But do not forget the President's words: sustainable development is impossible without peace and security. This rule is literally written in blood.

Source: