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 on countries to engage in dialogue. The President emphasized that if the bloodshed and fratricidal slaughter in Europe were not stopped and the escalation of the conflict were allowed, the entire civilized world would feel the heat. And what is happening today? Why does Belarus cherish peace, not only on its own land, which the Belarusian authorities have been calling for year after year to the international community, and from what idea, despite its seemingly naivety, has Alexander Lukashenko not yet abandoned? We answer these questions in a new issue of the BELTA YouTube project "As a Matter of Fact: The First'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 Accords.
In 2018, first at a meeting with the Special
"Belarus, like no other, 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 the 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 different 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 fake news are spread," said the senator. "We continue to work, on the one hand, on creating a system that ensures Belarus's security in the information sphere. 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 only began to propose peace initiatives after the crisis erupted in neighboring
Shall we look even further back? In 1999, the Head of State visited Yugoslavia, which was then subjected to constant bombings by NATO. Which still existed at that time. On the eve of his departure, the President stated that he was flying to Belgrade with the hope of resolving at least some of the problems and bringing about a resolution to the Yugoslav crisis. But even then, the unipolar world had other plans. With all the ensuing consequences: a flourishing 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 of 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 convergence
The Permanent Representative of Belarus to the UN Office at Geneva, Larisa Belskaya, emphasized that the logic guiding Western partners today ignores the real balance of power and the interests of countries not part of the North Atlantic Alliance. "It leads and has actually led to the breakdown of disarmament mechanisms and agreements, to the destruction of trust," stated the diplomat.
"Unfortunately, recently the expansion 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 perspective. 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 the case. Therefore, all of Belarus's peace initiatives are aimed at dialogue among 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 some basis," noted Larisa Belskaya.
She noted that the current geopolitical situation forces Western politicians to be guided by their immediate interests and not seek common ground with representatives of other countries.
What "in the spirit of San Francisco" means
Today, given the new circumstances, the negotiation process à la "Helsinki" is no longer sufficient, they believe in Belarus. Last year, a message from Alexander Lukashenko was delivered 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 from 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 organisation 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 humankind.
850 delegates participated in the San Francisco conference, 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 organisations. It was truly a global event. Not only one of the most important in history, but, in all likelihood, also the largest of all international gatherings ever to have taken place.
Negotiations in Finland, although on a much smaller scale, were also significant for the global community. 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 era. The "Helsinki Decalogue," the so-called 10 commandments, are not legally binding, yet they form the basis of political commitments and principles, among which the non-use of force and the inviolability of borders are key elements of European security.
"I hate war. And our Belarusians hate war"
"We have already started sounding the alarm, calling for an end to 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 do not want to. Or perhaps those who dominate these organizations are interested in it. Humanity is moving by leaps and bounds towards a precipice," warned Alexander Lukashenko 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 can see this 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 to support it. Therefore, you want war. We want peace! Do you hear, Americans? We want peace. Give Zelensky the command and sit down at the negotiating table with Putin yourselves, and I will sit next to you," the President said earlier this year during an interview with foreign journalists.
Why the West Imposes Sanctions
Recent events increasingly lead to another thought. The West has long been testing new weapons and, as a result, has 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. On May 2, documents were published in the Official Journal of the EU granting 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 haven't individuals who, in 2020, attempted to destabilize and overthrow the constitutional system in Belarus, participated in and supported destructive demonstrations, pushed their supporters towards open violence against law enforcement officers and uniformed personnel in general, found refuge in the European Union? And for some reason, it is not they, hiding from justice in Vilnius, Warsaw, and other cities, who have become the target 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.
"Following the adoption of the UN Charter, the formalisation of numerous international treaties, conventions, agreements, and UN General Assembly resolutions, a body of rules of conduct has been formed, which constitutes international law. Meanwhile, Western partners claim that certain rules of conduct exist which are not norms of international law, but are allegedly legally binding for all states. Those who act against the will of the West are instantly and unsubstantiatedly declared human rights violators, and the West asserts its right to punish the violator. How? Through sanctions," the diplomat stated.
Resources – like a sweet
But why are sanctions a weapon? Just look. The international community is concerned about global hunger and poverty. But how can these be eliminated when all resources are channelled into military confrontation, and the imposed prohibitions undermine global food security? Does this mean sanctions can kill?
Another interesting fact. This year, on the sidelines of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, an event was held to celebrate the 35th anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development. Its core 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, and Canada do not recognise the right to development and vote against resolutions that state that countries should be given the opportunity to develop, should be helped to develop, and should share resources and technologies with them," said Larisa Belskaya. "Unfortunately, this problem at the UN is long-standing and remains unresolved. This hypocrisy and duplicity shows that the powers that be do not want to share either technologies or resources, but simply want to manipulate weaker or developing, not sufficiently strong states for their own interests. Resources are like a sweet – here it is, and then 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 for peaceful negotiations from participants in conflicts, wherever they may erupt, and from geopolitical players. 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.
The project was created using funds from a targeted collection for the production of national content.
Source: belta.by