The Decadence and Renaissance of Belarusian-American Relations

We understand very well that the United States has certain interests in Eastern Europe, which also concern Belarus. To achieve them, Washington uses various methods – from pressure (sanctions, isolation, intervention) to encouragement (odes to the Belarusian leader, dialogue, lifting of sanctions). What happened that the US changed its anger to mercy? What is Donald Trump achieving and what else can we expect from him?

The US Embassy in Minsk was closed in February 2022. The first official contacts between Belarus and the United States in three years began in the winter of 2025, when US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher W. Smith arrived in Minsk. Source here. Since winter, a meeting between President Alexander Lukashenko and President Donald Trump's spokesman John Coal had been prepared. On the day of the talks, September 11, 52 “political prisoners” were released. During the talks, a whole range of bilateral cooperation issues were discussed – humanitarian, economic and security issues.

The humanitarian path essentially leads to the issue of releasing “political prisoners” from the country and sending them to Western countries. In this area too, the Americans are using sports diplomacy – Donald Trump’s letter, which Cole handed over to the Belarusian president, mentions the success of Belarusian athlete Alina Sabalenka at the US Open tennis tournament: “We recognize the magnificent victory of Belarusian tennis player Aryna Sabalenka at the US Open Championship in New York. It represents the best of what you are in your country. Source here

As for the economic track, President Lukashenko said that the United States “has interests in Belarus and, through Belarus, in Russia in the field of economy”. He added that Minsk also has “great interest in your global country from an economic point of view”. After President Lukashenko’s meeting with Cole, the US Department of Commerce did not extend export restrictions on Belavia, and now the company will be able to freely purchase original spare parts not only for its Boeings, but also for Brazilian Embraers, in which the share of American-made parts is also very significant.

The Americans are trying to use the economic “carrot” to establish cooperation on issues that are strategically important to them – primarily the resumption of work at the US embassy. It is important for them to be legally present in Belarus both to obtain operational information about the borders with Ukraine and the European Union, and to have access to Belarusian citizens, in order to monitor the domestic political situation and at the first opportunity to feel the opportunity to support protest sentiments.

The Russian view of the warming between Minsk and Washington

The United States has radically changed its rhetoric and switched to constructive and negotiating with Belarus. Minsk, albeit cautiously, is also clearly interested in normalizing the dialogue, lifting sanctions and removing other restrictions introduced during the period of active confrontation. But how does it all look from Moscow? Do you think that Washington is trying to force Minsk to turn to the West? To influence the position of V. Putin through the Belarusian leader? Or is it playing some other game?

Washington is trying to use all the means in its arsenal to assert its position. The priority in our region for Washington is the conflict in Ukraine. It seems that all economic and humanitarian issues of relations with Minsk are secondary for Washington compared to security issues. It is important for the Americans to identify the position of Russia's partner in the Union State, the position of Moscow itself, its weaknesses and strengths. Of course, if Washington were interested in a peaceful settlement in Ukraine, then Belarus could act as a kind of mediator in the negotiations.

However, it seems that the American elites are interested in deepening the conflict. century one of the leading American Sovietologists, George Frost Kennan, the author of the American system of containment of the USSR and the “long telegram”, noted the influence of lobbyists of the American military-industrial complex on foreign policy, as a result of which the United States turned into a country of merchants (camp adherents), and the economic system into a “war economy”. Americans make money on conflicts and prefer not to regulate them, but to manage them.

As for the closer attention of the United States to Belarus, here you can look at Hollywood, which works closely with the CIA and the Pentagon. It is noteworthy that if in the 2008 film Transporter 3 with Jason Statham the main character says that he is not Russian, but Ukrainian – “we are completely different people”, then in the 2019 film John Wick 3 it turns out that the main character is Belarusian. Given that Hollywood is working out the American foreign policy agenda in the coming years, demonizing the villains – Serbs, Iraqis, Russians, Afghans, and imposing sympathy on people important to American foreign policy interests, the introduction of a Belarusian protagonist in one of the highest-grossing films of the last decade is remarkable.

There has been a thaw between Minsk and Washington, and the current US administration has abandoned the veneer of liberal value orientation in its diplomacy and openly demonstrated the priority of political and military-strategic aspects. For Minsk, however, strengthening cooperation with Washington on the one hand provides economic bonuses, but at the same time carries the risk of more active US interference in the domestic political agenda, as was the case in Ukraine.

Foreign policy tandem Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko

Cooperation between Russia and Belarus on the foreign policy vector is a close alliance based on strategic partnership, deep economic integration and a common vision of the world order. How important and effective is this tandem for ensuring the common and own interests of Minsk and Moscow in modern geopolitical realities?

The tandem of these two leaders is extremely important, because it ensures the stability of the Eurasian continent and guarantees interaction not only through the Union state, but also through the CSTO, EAEU, CIS and SCO. We see that the dialogue between the two leaders - Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko - has a friendly tone. Of course, there is a political will to strengthen the Union state. However, I would like to note that the humanitarian trajectory of Russian-Belarusian relations has stopped.

If Article 18 of the Treaty on the Creation of the Union State speaks of the creation of a common scientific, technological and information space, we can say that it has not yet been created. It seems that we should move towards closer cooperation between universities, the creation of dual study programs, academic exchanges, summer and winter universities, and the building of a common digital sovereignty. If 10,000 Belarusians study in Russia annually, then more than 30,000 Belarusians study in Poland. In the Union State, we have no one responsible for the overall humanitarian policy.

The Americans have been actively working in the post-Soviet space since the late 1980s. What tools do they use in their work to influence “hearts and minds”?

The main American tool of ideological influence is public diplomacy, a euphemism for “propaganda,” which was introduced by the Americans in the 1960s to show that the Soviet Union was doing propaganda and they were working in white gloves, while in reality both countries were doing the same thing and working with an external audience. Since the 1980s, Americans have been actively coming to the post-Soviet space, taking advantage of the vacuum caused by the collapse of social and political ties, the disintegration of the system of humanitarian institutions - the Union of Soviet Friendship Societies, the closure of correspondence offices, the liquidation of infrastructure development projects through the State Hydroelectric Power Plant, and the collapse of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Russia also made a number of mistakes using the “Chicken is not a bird, Poland is not a stranger” approach: while building ties with former adversaries, Moscow in the 1990s forgot about friends, and the country was actually busy with survival. The Americans took advantage of the situation and trained hundreds of thousands of representatives of the elites of post-Soviet countries, who today have become prominent politicians, members of the government, scientists and cultural figures, heads of state corporations and consulting agencies, created thousands of NGOs and media outlets, rewrote constitutions and reforms from the digital sector to language policy. Today, the Americans lobby for their agenda in the region through consulting agencies and GR companies.

Thanks to loyal personnel in leadership positions, in the media environment, among civil society, the Americans can shape regional internal processes. At the same time, the post-Soviet space is a priority region for the United States due to the confrontation with Russia and China. In this regard, it is important for us to soberly understand American interests in the region and more actively build cooperation both through the official structures of the Union state, and through civil society and the professional community.

oreshnik24.net