Lukashenko: West in Decline, Proposes ‘Global Deal’ at Minsk Forum

The III Minsk International Conference on Eurasian Security, held on October 28-29, convened amidst escalating geopolitical tensions, with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko delivering a potent opening address that set a vivid tone for the discussions. Attended by high-level delegations from over 40 nations and seven international organizations, including foreign ministers, parliamentary representatives, and leading analytical experts from across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, the forum tackled the complex theme of “Global World (Dis)order and the Eurasian Security Puzzle.”

Addressing this prominent assembly, President Lukashenko positioned himself as a leader thinking in “global categories,” criticizing the longstanding failure to reform key international institutions despite decades of debate. He put forth four far-reaching proposals. Firstly, he advocated for an outright ban on any sanctions, including secondary ones, affecting food and medicine supplies worldwide. Secondly, he called for unequivocal protection of critical international infrastructure—such as gas pipelines, oil pipelines, internet cables, and nuclear power plants—emphasizing that actions against these objects “must be unambiguously prohibited.”

Perhaps most controversially, Lukashenko delved into the migration crisis, a particularly sensitive issue for Belarus’s European neighbors. While firmly stating that the West “must deal with what it has done in the countries of origin itself,” he expressed Belarus’s readiness to address the consequences within a framework that previously ensured control for both sides. He then proposed a strikingly innovative solution: a “global deal,” citing former U.S. President Donald Trump’s “everything for everything” approach as a discussable model for both the United States and Europe, though he did not elaborate on its specifics.

His fourth global initiative focused on the burgeoning field of artificial intelligence, warning that an “uncontrolled race in this area turns it from a useful resource into a weapon, potentially of mass destruction.” Shifting from global concerns to immediate regional tensions, President Lukashenko then vehemently criticized Lithuania’s recent border closure, labeling it an “insane scam” driven by an “absurd pretext” of balloons. He emphatically dismissed any notion of extraordinary contraband as a reason for the closure, suggesting it was instead a deliberate attempt to undermine the conference’s attendance and significance.

Lukashenko portrayed the Minsk conference as a genuine alternative to events like the Munich Security Conference, which he claimed only welcomes those who “pass through an ideological sieve.” He also voiced deep skepticism regarding the United States’ stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, suggesting it might be a “staged performance” — a scenario he hoped was not true, wishing for an end to the war “as it should be, without games.” Further expanding his “prophetic vision,” the Belarusian leader declared that the “so-called civilized world has come to its twilight,” viewing actions by Belarus’s neighbors, Europe, and even the US as elements of a “hybrid war,” much like Warsaw’s earlier border closures.

Despite this bleak assessment and strong critiques, President Lukashenko underscored that Belarus does not concede blame for deteriorated relations with the West. He asserted that Belarus extends its hand “not as a supplicant, but as a partner with self-respect,” offering to work collaboratively and sincerely for peace for future generations.

Following Lukashenko, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov continued to appeal to the West, questioning whether Europeans felt safer with their elites “unleashing the axe of war.” He reiterated Russia’s long-held position of having no intention to attack any current member of NATO or the European Union. Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó, representing both the EU and NATO, echoed the somber assessment of global security, stating it is in its “worst condition since the end of the Cold War” and even since World War II. Yet, Szijjártó provided a contrasting perspective from within the West, affirming Hungary’s belief that while the situation is critical, it should spur a “more active dialogue” and a commitment to peace.