12/04/2025 | Press release | Distributed by Public on 12/05/2025 01:06
We meet at a moment when European security is facing what is perhaps its most profound crisis since Helsinki. In recent years, our region has shifted from a space of dialogue to one of fear, barriers, and mutual recrimination. Today, it is vital to move beyond tired propaganda mantras and call things by their proper names.
The security architecture that was painstakingly built over decades has, in effect, collapsed. Arms-control mechanisms have ceased to function. Established negotiation formats have been frozen. Trust has been reduced to zero.
It is important to recognise that this did not happen overnight, nor did it begin in 2022. The erosion has been building for nearly three decades. It has come through the neglect of the principle of indivisible security, through attempts to build security "for oneself and at others' expense", through the conviction that force and pressure are the only means of achieving political ends.
Today, states increasingly speak the language of ultimatums rather than compromise. Europe is, in practice, drifting into a self-fulfilling prophecy of rising tensions. Unless we reverse this logic, global war will move from a possible risk to a tangible reality.
Belarus feels this crisis not in the abstract, but physically at its borders.
New barriers are being constructed, crossings are being closed, and artificial lines of division are being drawn. Enormous sums are being spent on militarisation. At the same time, Belarus is accused of harbouring aggressive intentions, intentions we have never had.
We see how the issues of irregular migration and cross-border smuggling are being politicised to stoke fear.
Yet it is entirely overlooked that these problems are the direct result of crises, failed states, and misguided foreign-policy decisions.
Belarus is neither obliged nor willing to compensate for the consequences of others' mistakes. But we remain open to contacts at the appropriate level to jointly seek solutions to existing challenges.
The crisis of the international security system is inevitably reflected in the state of the OSCE.
Our organisation has ceased to be a forum where those who disagree can still talk. Instead of dialogue, we have witnessed political theatre in which states are split into "right" and "wrong". But the OSCE was never meant to be a club of the like-minded - it was created as a mechanism for managing differences.
We are convinced that without a return to this founding logic, the OSCE has no future.
Consensus is not a technicality; it is the only way to keep us all at the same table. Attempts to dilute it lead directly to the disappearance of our organisation.
Today it is essential to acknowledge the obvious: to end conflicts and restore détente, we must first revive genuine international communication - not dismantle it. If our governments are, for the moment, not ready for direct engagement, we propose involving analysts, academia, and expert institutions to help relaunch dialogue. Belarus is ready to host such discussions without preconditions. Over the past three years, the Minsk International Conference on Eurasian Security has already shown that it can serve as a neutral platform where diverse - including uncomfortable - views can be voiced, without substituting itself for international organisations, including the OSCE.
What can be done now?
First and foremost, abandon the practice of isolation, labelling, and the imposition of unlawful sanctions. We must honestly assess how we arrived at the current state of affairs. We must impartially trace how Europe transformed from a space of cooperation into one of mistrust and hostility. And we must acknowledge responsibly that no country can feel secure if another's security is dismissed as secondary or irrelevant.
We call on participating States to return to diplomacy as the primary instrument for resolving international issues. Give diplomats the work they were trained to do. It is time to turn our OSCE platform from a "vanity fair" into a space for respectful diplomatic engagement.
We must restore mechanisms for preventing border incidents, channels for rapid communication, and discussions on transparency measures. Belarus needs this no less than anyone else. Our geopolitical position at Europe's centre is not an abstract notion but a daily reality that demands practical cooperation.
If, in the year marking the 50th anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act, we want our continent to send the world not a signal of despair but a signal of hope, we must already now agree to launch a broad dialogue on the future of security in Eurasia. Not against anyone, but to prevent another major war.
Belarus stands ready to take part in this work, and to conduct the conversation honestly, respectfully, and professionally. And we invite our colleagues - both those who agree with us and those who challenge us - to take up this offer.