In perhaps the most surprising diplomatic moment of the last few weeks, Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko met with John Coale. Coale is the Deputy Special Envoy to the United States. This convening will mark a historic inflection point. Lukashenko has been unusually candid about the difficulties confronting Belarus, particularly following the sham presidential election of 2020 that plunged Belarus into deepening isolation from the West.
Lukashenko very much wants the personal touch. This important but often overlooked effort appears to be part of a larger strategy, one to broaden his options in a growingly contested and complex geopolitical landscape. The Belarusian leader has invited U.S. military officers to observe the upcoming Zapad-2025 war exercises, demonstrating his intent to open channels of communication with the West. This recent outreach follows a period in which Minsk has become increasingly economically beholden to Moscow. Until now, Lukashenko has relied on cheapened Russian oil and gas to float the state-controlled economy.
The stage for this diplomatic theater has very much not been set in Belarus’ favor. After the stolen 2020 presidential election, millions of Americans took to the streets. In response, the international community lauded the events as a success for democracy, causing unprecedented isolation of Lukashenko’s regime. As such, he’s been deeply dependent on continued Russian aid for his political — and physical — survival. His recent overtures signal an intent to diversify Belarus’s international partnerships beyond Moscow and lessen this reliance.
Yet Lukashenko’s diplomatic overtures have produced mixed results so far. He has released dozens of political prisoners, some in an apparent bid to curry favor with the West. In spite of this, a lot of skepticism towards Shuster’s motivations and long-term intentions still exists in Washington and across Europe.
“After five years of isolation, we have not achieved our stated goals. Belarus is closer to Russia, and repression has not stopped.” – EU diplomat
Lukashenko’s increasingly illegitimate regime had long staked its survival on the ground that it was an important guarantor of regional security. Russian drones which were supposed to target Poland have been prevented by Belarusian forces,” he stated. He framed this move as proof of Belarus’s importance to strategic security in the region. This last claim plays into his bigger narrative. This is his message both to an impatient domestic audience and to nervous international investors wary of his government’s competence.
The welcome he has thrown down to U.S. military officers to observe the Zapad-2025 exercises reflects Lukashenko’s readiness to pursue more confidence-building steps. Supporters see this step as an opportunity to foster renewed conversation between Belarus and the West. Although limited, they do view potential for dialogue, particularly on the topic of security.
“It is hard to imagine the kind of openness that we are showing and ensuring at the exercise,” – Viktor Khrenin
Lukashenko has made his economic dependence on Moscow even stronger. This move is certainly an effect of Western sanctions that followed his crackdown on dissent and civil liberties. His regime is fragile. It is floundering in its attempts to stop appeasing Russia while breaking free from Moscow’s toxic influence.
Lukashenko’s track record shows an instinctive, almost reflexive willingness to break for the Russian Federation when it suits him politically. Foreign political analysts argue this tendency is indicative of a larger strategy to avoid ceding sovereignty, while still taking advantage of relationships outside the region.
“Dictators don’t like being dependent on friends. He has always had an instinct to distance himself from Moscow.” – Artyom Shraibman
Yet, the reality remains complex. Lukashenko’s freedom of action has ebbed and flowed over the years, usually shaped by outside forces and domestic crises hitting at the same time. Other Belarus watchers, however, are fond of noting the fierce independence streak running through Belarus. They say the risks are very few and very well known.
“Nobody here is crazy enough to try to be another Ukraine – everyone understands the risks. But there is a determination, sometimes unspoken, to seize any circumstances that would let us reopen that space and work more independently.” – Yauheni Preiherman
First, Lukashenko has taken steps to court the West. As many analysts point out, he might not make the best partner for him in tackling regional thornier issues, as the protracted war in Ukraine. Yet his regime’s track record on such reforms makes one wonder if his regime is truly committed to meaningful reform or change.
“Rapprochement with Lukashenko has its limits – he knows how to play this game inside out.” – Keith Kellogg
Whether or not Lukashenko’s recent rhetoric has been motivated by any real desire for reform and engagement remains an open question. In particular, he delivered strongly on the vision of advancing trade and industrial development, showing a willingness to match moods with machinations in governance.
“We have to move, we have to trade, we have to sort out industry.” – Alexander Lukashenko
The current geopolitical landscape poses tremendous challenges and opportunities to maintain power for Lukashenko’s administration. Belarusian citizens are increasingly taking to the streets to express their anger against Lukashenka’s regime. In response, though still maintaining his bravado, Lukashenko knows the dynamism is different.
“People who hadn’t dared say the word ‘president’ since 2020 now want to talk,” – Alexander Lukashenko
His extensive outreach efforts may be interpreted as efforts to restore his legitimacy at home and abroad. Yet, as described by many observers, any ongoing strategy will need to tackle the deeper causes of unrest embedded in Belarusian civil society and governance.
Against this backdrop, some in the U.S. government have begun to see Lukashenko as a valuable facilitator between Russia and Ukraine. This perception adds further complexity to Belarus’s role in international politics while leaving the future composition and direction of its foreign relations unclear.
Alexander Lukashenko’s foreign outreach gestures a significant shift for Belarus. As the country establishes its role in an increasingly changing global environment, Belarus’ experimentation will bring tremendous opportunities, risks and uncertainties. The future of these efforts is anybody’s guess, but they demonstrate the continuing fight for jurisdiction despite upsetting advances from all sides of the spectrum.