Global Courant
The threat of Russia using nuclear weapons in Ukraine is “real” and “absolutely irresponsible”said US President Joe Biden. He responded to questions from journalists about whether he believed Belarus had received Russian tactical nuclear weapons.
If true, it would be the first time Russia has deployed nuclear warheads outside its borders since the end of the Cold War. This does not immediately mean a nuclear escalation with NATO, since Russian nuclear missiles stationed in the Kaliningrad region have already brought Poland and the Baltic states within reach. Being experts skeptical about Russia’s intentions to use these weapons in Ukraine.
But the presence of tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus nevertheless has important implications for European security.
It would change the nature of the relationship between Russia and Belarus and bring Belarus more deeply under Russian control. The two countries are already in what is known as oneunion stateafter Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko and Boris Yeltsin signed a series of treaties in the mid-1990s.
These allowed for “deeper economic integration” and the “formation of a single economic space”, as well as the coordination of foreign policy and military activities between the two countries.
The “union” was relatively loose until the mass protests in Belarus in 2020 led the desperate Lukashenko to agree to a much closer economic and military integration with Russia.
The real target
Noting that this “is not an escalation of Putin’s previous nuclear weapons rhetoric,” the Institute for the Study of War says this is more increasing military grip of Moscow on Belarus: “The Kremlin likely intends to use these requirements to further subordinate the Belarusian security sphere under Russia.”
The nuclear warheads will be under Russian control. Storage facilities are reported to be under construction for completion in early July. This requires a significant Russian military presence and permanent military bases in Belarus.
Belarusians do not want Russian nuclear weapons on their territory. Chatham House researchers who conduct regular surveys in Belarus have found that 74% of respondents in their March 2023 survey objected to the implementation.
The rejection of nuclear weapons is even more dramatic when analyzing which media outlets consume the respondents. Belarusian state media is beating a ruthlessly pro-Moscow drum. Among those who do not consume state media, between 97% and 98% are against.
The prospect of Russian military bases is hardly more popular: only 24% of respondents supported it in a previous Chatham House survey in June 2022. The idea of a common foreign policy and military with Russia was supported by only 9% in the March 2023 poll.
This is yet another indicator of the gap between the regime and the people, which was made clear by the 2020 proteststhe largest in recent Belarusian history.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Belarusian counterpart Alexander Lukashenko pose on a yacht during a trip on the Black Sea on May 29, 2021. Photo: Sputnik / Sergei Ilyin
Belarusians have traditionally been hesitant to take sides when it comes to political alliances. And despite a “mood” that one amendment of the country’s constitution to allow Russia to station nuclear weapons on its territory, the country is increasingly divided between those who watch Russia and those who favor it closer relations with Western Europe.
After Russia invaded Ukraine, a Chatham House survey found that 47% were against the invasion, while only 33% were in favour. Found another poll 93% would not support Belarus enter the war.
Chernobyl fallout
And Belarusians also have good reason to strongly oppose nuclear weapons. The memory of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. About 70% of the radioactive fallout landed on its territoryand there is evidence that Moscow intentionally placed clouds so that radioactive rain fell over Belarus instead of drifting towards Moscow.
The political repercussions were slower, but no less important: Chernobyl commemorations have grown over the years into a annual collection point for opposition to Lukashenko. It also helped ensure that independent Belarus first among post-Soviet nations to give up his Soviet nuclear arsenal.
These points seem lost on Lukashenko, who has declared public that he will not consider the opinion of the Belarusian people on the use of nuclear weapons.
The opinion of the opposition is dangerous in Belarusand state terror against all criticism of the regime has only increased since Russia invaded Ukraine. The number of those arrested and sentenced to long prison terms is steadily increasing. As of June 21, Belarus had 1,492 political prisoners.
This is just the tip of the iceberg of repression. Not only opposition activists, NGO workers and independent journalists, but anyone who can be linked to the 2020 protests or who has ever spoken out against the regime on social media is at risk of arrest.
The recent Report of the UN Human Rights Office condemned “the unacceptable picture of impunity and the almost total destruction of civil space and fundamental freedoms in Belarus”, including the systematic use of unlawful detention, violence and torture.
Consequences for Belarus and beyond
Lukashenko is playing a dangerous game. Belarus’ economic dependence on Moscow, which was already heavy, has been further elaborated by Western sanctions and the war in Ukraine. Russia’s share of Belarus’ trade grew from 49% in 2021 to 60% at the end of 2022. Recently, a joint tax deal with Russia, previously opposed by Minsk, reduced Belarusian control about tax.
According to the independent Belarusian supervisory organization, the Hajun project, there is no evidence that warheads have arrived. But deploying Russian nuclear warheads would lead to Moscow’s permanent military presence.
This intercontinental ballistic missile was launched as part of Russia’s 2020 test of its strategic forces. Photo: Press Service of the Russian Ministry of Defense
It would mean a further loss of authority for Lukashenko and his generals. Worse still, if Putin decided to use tactical nukes against Ukraine, an easier decision would be to launch them from Belarus and let them reap the whirlwind of retaliation.
Consolidating his control over Belarus would be a major strategic victory for Putin’s imperial ambitions. Preoccupied with fighting in Ukraine and lacking a clear and decisive policy towards Belarus, the West has no clear immediate response.
But if Moscow continues its threat, it would be a dangerous moment – not only for Belarus but for all of Europe.
Natalya Chernyshova is a lecturer in modern European history, Queen Mary University of London
This article has been republished from The conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Similar:
Loading…
Related
