Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday visited Minsk for the first time since 2019 to meet with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, and the two leaders agreed to strengthen military and economic cooperation.
Putin said that Moscow and Minsk would continue their joint military drills, which increased since October when Russia deployed a force of about 9,000 troops to Belarus to help secure the country’s border. “Joint military planning is ongoing, within the framework of implementing the common military doctrine of Russia and Belarus,” Putin said.
Lukashenko allowed Putin to launch a part of his initial invasion of Ukraine from Belarusian territory, but Belarusian forces never entered the fighting. Putin’s trip to Minsk stirred rumors that Russia was looking to bring Belarus into the war, but the Kremlin rejected the idea, calling the speculation “groundless fabrications.”
Lukashenko drew much closer to Putin after the US and EU rejected the results of the 2020 Belarus elections, which saw the Belarusian leader secure another term. After the election, the US and EU threw support behind Lukashenko’s opposition and imposed more sanctions on Belarus.
Belarus has also been targeted by the same sanctions Russia has been hit with since the invasion of Ukraine. Putin said the two countries were working together to counter the Western sanctions.
“We are countering together the sanction pressure from unfriendly states and attempts to isolate Russia and Belarus on global markets. We are coordinating steps to mitigate the impact of unlawful restrictive measures on the economy of our countries. We are doing this fairly confidently and efficiently,” he said.
Putin has previously said that Western sanctions have sped up the “unification process” of Russia and Belarus as the two countries work to implement a 1997 integration treaty. Under the treaty, known as the Union State, Russia and Belarus would remain separate sovereign states, but people living in each country would get citizenship for the other and would be able to travel freely, and their economies would become more integrated.
Lukashenko said Monday that Russia and Belarus had made significant progress on almost all Union State projects but added that there was more work to do. “Belarusian and Russian specialists have done a lot to implement the union programs we approved with Vladimir Putin. Certain progress has been made in practically all spheres. But so far, not everything has worked out and this is holding back our development,” he said.
I wonder if Belarus realizes that they are likely next on Putin’s hit list. You know the old story Belarus is historically part of Russia, etc.
Belarus would be likelier to be on NATO’s hit list.
Highly doubt that, unless Putin orders Belarus to get stupid and fire something at Poland.
You just read in this article that the west is sanctioning Belarus because they didn’t like the way an election went, and your conclusion is that the west would never have hostile intentions toward belarus?
Remind me, how many governments has the CIA admitted to overthrowing?
What the heck would NATO want with Belarus?
I would think he meant if they side with Russia. You’re the one that used the term “hit list”. Do you know what it means?
What the heck did NATO want with Ukraine? NATO could plan, fund, and at least try to execute a violent coup in Minsk, like they did in Kiev and that’s how they would be on Belarus’ hit list.
Yep, Belarus annexed first then a cross border invasion of Kazakhstan when Russian Army is rebuilt.
So, when Russia’s army is rebuilt, it won’t be the “paper tiger” you described it as being? No longer a “gas station with nukes”? And since according to you, they are getting their a$$ handed to them in Ukraine, exactly how and when do they do the rebuild? You really should remember what you babble about.
I remember what I say and i have said all that but since you could be a bit stubborn, perhaps conveniently or perhaps not too military savvy which I doubt, I’ll break it down for you.
When Russia is Rebuilt (if still under the Putin or equivalent power), they will be tough enough to think they can take on another country with a lesser size and capable Army so they will go for it if the opportunity to take land and keep gas monopoly presents itself.
A gas station with Nukes cannot take a country, it can only nuke it.
So according to you they aren’t
getting their assess handed to them? Before 24 Feb they were the “second largest Army in the world” Now, they can’t even take Eastern Ukraine. Is that because they are having a good time losing cannon fodders in the frontlines? I thought you served in the military. Did you learn anything about Warfighting?
You know much about being in the peanut gallery against US but provide zero solutions to the problem set. Just US this and US that.
Oh Russia wants to negotiate? Really, go talk to Putin about peace. Short of surrendering Ukraine, you won’t get much farther.
Your first paragraph has them being “rebuilt”. You failed to mention how. If, as you reiterate, they are getting their asses handed to them in Ukraine, at what point would they be able to rebuild? And then after their miraculous build up, all the while getting thrashed, they’ll think they are “tough enough” to go after smaller countries even though they couldn’t “even take” Eastern Ukraine. Hard to argue with logic like that.
look, you just don’t understand. There doesn’t need to be any logic at all behind anything, because the US says the Russia is both incredibly weak and pathetic and at the same time the greatest threat in the world that’s going to invade poland and germany and belarus tomorrow, so it must be true. Who cares if it doesn’t make any sense?!
First, they’d have to get into bed with the West and be convinced to be a sacrificial lamb. Like Ukraine.
Well that is Putin MO, attacked countries that are friendly to the West. Little wonder why Finland is joining NATO.
And I said they’d have to get into bed with the west before they’d be on any “hit list”. “Hit list” implies a hostile takeover. There would be no reason for Belarus to be on Russia’s “hit list” otherwise.
Hmm, you may want to review Putin’s previous and current statements on Belarus plus the build up of his policies towards same. He has been preparing that Unification for a while and Lukashenko has been helping. Belarus doesn’t have to go to bed with the West, Putin will absorb Belarus before that even occurs. Belarus (not Belarusians) is Russia, just not yet official.
Putin doesn’t have to “absorb” Belarus. It’s been a Russian imperial satrapy ever since “independence,” and Lukashenko will follow whatever instructions Tsar Vladimir gives him.
It’s NOT bending the knee that brings on the attempts to “absorb.” And it’s not obvious that Tsar Vladimir would be any more successful trying that with Belarus than he has been with Ukraine.
Well they say a small Soviet army will always lose to a large Soviet army. I imagine strategy and tactics are the same between those two.
Kenneth said Putin’s “hit list”. That’s implying Putin would do to them what he did in Ukraine. Me saying that wouldn’t happen unless they got into bed with the West was in response to what he was implying.
This is the dumbest foreign policy claim I’ve ever heard. Belarus and Russia have been allies for ever! Russia has no reason to invade Belarus when Belarus and Russia are already perfectly in alignment on all issues!
You liberal foreign policy types keep predicting that american involvement will prevent wars and time after time they flare wars up. Then whenever a country makes pragmatic realistic decisions it’s “oh well they’re going to get back stabbed for sure”, when the opposite is true! Russia invaded countries that got closer to NATO (georgia and Ukraine), not the other way around. Most surefire way to get invaded by Russia is to first invite america and NATO in, contrary to the false claim of NATO dissuading Russian invasion.
Belarus is completely safe with russia.
Must be the Christmas Truce in Antiwar today. Nothing negative to say about Zelensky and the West following this article.
Either these two dictators die of an accidental fall from a window or from age like Fidel Castro. Won’t be putting money on the latter.
I’m just having my first cup of coffee… Give me time….
Donna, I got to give you credit for being honest.
Zelensky is on his way out in favor of the more pragmatic General Zaluzhny, who sees the handwriting on the wall.
If by way out you mean an assassination by Russian state actors, then that’s a possibility but not by the people of Ukraine. He is well liked now.
The people of Ukraine have no say in it when a power hungry dictator is in charge, which is what Zelensky is.
Where did you come up with information?
Read the Economist interviews and then ponder deeply on these questions: Why would a leading publication of the Western MSM feature these interviews at this moment, and what might the rather different messages from Zelensky and Zaluzhny suggest?
“the economist” is the leading publication of western MSM? Really?
I mean, don’t get me wrong, it is western MSM, but it certainly ain’t “the leading publication”. Ever heard of NYT or WaPo?
Reading for meaning is important, Joseph. One of the basics necessary for doing that well is to learn the difference between definite and indefinite articles.
Edit: Oh, and just so you know, the Economist’s print circulation is more than five (5) times that of the Washington Post.
BTW, According to wiki, the New York times circulation 9.8 million and Economist is 1.6 million.
Yes. So?
It means some people have vivid imagination. Do you have any concrete links that clearly shows that Zelensky is going to be replaced in the near future?
Of course not.