Russia invades Ukraine: what role does Belarus play in the conflict

An organizer for the ceasefire or full support for Putin’s plans?

Belarus is a key player in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, although its cards do not seem entirely clear.

On the one hand, organizes negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian delegates; but, on the other hand, he serves his land for the military deployment ordered against Ukraine by Vladimir Putin.

And this Sunday he voted for a change in his Constitution that paves the way to return to harboring nuclear weapons.

“If you are [Occidente] transfer nuclear weapons to Poland or Lithuania, to our borders, then I will turn to Putin to recover the nuclear weapons that I unconditionally handed over in 1994,” said Alexandr Lukashenko, president of Belarus, this Sunday as he left an electoral headquarters.

Belarus, under the leadership of Lukashenko, is a faithful ally of the Kremlin; and, in this way, it would have nuclear weapons for the first time since it gained independence from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1990.

The referendum also strengthened Lukashenko himself, who at 67 has effectively secured the country’s presidency until 2035. He has been in power since 1994.

Lukashenko has been widely branded as an authoritarian governor and accused of censoring the opposition, independent press and being subservient to the interests of the Kremlin.

What role does Belarus have in the conflict with Ukraine?

The meeting organized by Lukashenko between Russian and Ukrainian delegates seems like one of the peaceful exits of this conflict that keeps the whole world on edge.

“Like he did in 2014, Lukashenko now wants to show his usefulness and mediate these talks between Russia and Ukraine,” Dina Fainberg, a professor in the Department of International Politics at City University of London, tells BBC World.

In 2014, Belarus also hosted the negotiations that tried to defuse the confrontation between Ukrainians and pro-Russian separatists in the Donbas region, the so-called “minsk protocols”.

But, despite this mediating attitude, since the beginning of the current invasion it has been reported that Russian troops have left Belarus for Ukraine under the permissiveness of Lukashenko, a position widely criticized by the West.

In fact, this Sunday, the same day that the talks between Ukraine and Russia were announced, an adviser to the Ukrainian Ministry of the Interior said that iskander missiles had been fired from Belarus.

This, despite an earlier statement from Ukraine saying that Lukashenko had “taken responsibility for ensuring that all planes, helicopters and missiles stationed on Belarusian territory were grounded during the trip, talk and return of the Ukrainian delegation.”

This Monday there has also been speculation that Belarusian troops could join the invasion of the Russian side. Reports have appeared in US media, such as Washington Postand the Ukrainian The Kyiv Independentand suggest that this military deployment could happen from this Monday.

To these reports is added the result of the Belarusian referendum on Sunday, which creates the framework to be able to dispose of nuclear weapons.

This movement coincided with Putin’s order to put in a state of “special alert” to its deterrent forces, including the nuclear arsenal. The announcement does not mean that Russia intends to use the weapons, but it was widely perceived as a threat.

What does it imply that Belarus can have nuclear weapons again?

“The new military doctrine will include greater integration between the two Armies (Belarussian and Russian) and allows Russia’s potential nuclear deployment on Belarusian territory”, analyzed William Alberque, director of strategy, technology and arms control for the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

Between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan agreed to hand over their nuclear weapons in exchange for security premises that Belarus now says have been broken.

For Fainberg, it is something that “we need to take ourselves very seriously”.

“It could have a significant impact on future deterrence and how the region will look after the conflict. It is very worrying because, in addition to the possibility of harboring nuclear weapons, Lukashenko also ensured more time in power and that is more time being faithful to Putin and the Kremlin”, Fainberg tells BBC World.

Belarus’s move would allow Russia to place its nuclear weapons door-to-door with Poland, territorial entry into the European Union.

A fact that, according to Pablo de Orellana, professor of international relations at King’s College London, is reminiscent of times gone by.

“The possible nuclearization of Belarus, in my opinion, is a cold war game. Putin could, in this way, increase the threat from him over Europe”, the academic tells BBC World.

Orellana draws a kind of parallel to the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, when the main opposing blocs of the Cold War, the United States and the USSR, came close to nuclear shock.

“Then the threat served to withdraw the missiles. If Putin’s next move is to move nukes into Belarus, it would at least be less of an escalation than firing them. Is a way to use weapons without using them really,” says the expert.

Why is Belarus so important to Putin?

For a long time, Belarus tried to keep a balanced position between the West and the Kremlin.

But this relatively neutral position took a radical turn with the unprecedented anti-government protests who branded Lukashenko a dictator and tried to evict him from power in 2020, after a disputed presidential election in which the political opposition was persecuted and suppressed.

It was the turning point that experts point out for Lukashenko to lose more independence, get even closer to Putin and turn Belarus into “practically the same state as Russia,” says Orellana.

“What happened to Lukashenko in Belarus is the Putin’s main fear: Western liberal revolutions. Putin almost lost Lukashenko and, with him, control over a key territory to dominate all access to the Eurasian space,” he adds.

For Fainberg, the political earthquake against Lukashenko in 2020 was something that the West did not pay due attention to. It was a “missed opportunity”, he says, in which Europe could have done more to avoid the current role of this country.

“We need to see what is happening as a European conflict and not as some kind of crazy barbarians in Eastern Europe fighting each other. This affects all of Europe and will mark the coming years”, says Fainberg.

Several experts agree that Putin’s plan is get in Ukraine the same as in Belarus: a sympathetic government that serves its interests and shelters it geopolitically from the threat it sees in the West.

However, the Russian president continues to insist that the sole purpose of his “special military operation” is to defend the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine, whom he considers to be under threat from the current government.