How Putin’s Recent Announcement of the Placement of Nuclear Weapons in Belarus Will Affect the Region
On August 25th, 2020, Russian President Vladimir Putin made a startling announcement; that Russia, in order to protect itself and its allies, would be stationing nuclear weapons in Belarus. The Belarus-Russia partnership has been close for many years, but this latest declaration has drawn attention from many of the Russian Federation’s neighbors and the international community.
Despite the potential buildup of militarized forces and strategic positioning of nuclear weapons on the NATO-aligned and EU-member borders, the international community is highly concerned with the implications and consequences of the placement of such powerful weapons. In this article, we will explore the reactions, implications, and impacts of this posturing, and how it stands to affect the stability of the region.
The History of Russia and Belarus
Russia and Belarus have had a complex relationship for many centuries, with the countries fluctuating between being separate entities and unified as one. This relationship is further complicated by their intertwined leaders, with President Alexander Lukashenka of Belarus having held office for over twenty-five years, and Vladimir Putin governing Russia for two decades. In 1999, Russia and Belarus signed the Treaty of Creation of the Union State, electing to become a unified political force. This treaty was with the aim of preserving their close ties and creating a closer relationship while still maintaining their individual independence.
But due to disputes over human rights and political influence, the Treaty of Creation of the Union State has been in limbo since 2009. Vladimir Putin made the announcement of the placement of nuclear weapons in Belarus in 2020, reviving the talks of creating a unified state between the two nations. Putin’s announcement has not made clear whether the deployment of nuclear weapons is meant to inspire warmth and security between neighboring countries, or to threaten them.
Reaction to Putin’s Announcement
After Putin’s announcement, leaders from neighboring states were quick to react with concern. The Prime Minister of Latvia, Arturs Kristsklavs, noted that the tensions created from Russia could spread easily across the border. Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda expressed outrage towards the move, believing that it maliciously provoked NATO members and creates instability in the region. The leaders of Estonia, Poland, and the Czech Republic also vocalized their disdain. NATO leaders have also made a statement, saying that they are aware of the “heightened militarization” of the region and they may take action with to protect their allies.
Though Putin attempted to reassure the international community by claiming the weapons were purely defensive, the reactions of the NATO countries and Russia’s neighbors belie its true purpose. Putin may be attempting to establish a military presence on their border, or to threaten those perceived as a threat to the stability of Putin’s rule.
The Implications for Belarus
The announcement of placing nuclear weapons in Belarus also has implications for the country itself. Though for many years Putin has maintained a close relationship with the government of Belarus, this announcement gives Russia more control over the country. Putin’s announcement may point to the intentions of transferring more power from the Belarusian government to Moscow, establishing a more unified state akin to the Russian Federation.
This could mean severe implications for those living in Belarus in terms of their rights and democracy. Putin’s announcement has yet to clarify the details of the decision and its subsequent impacts, but the potential threat of military escalation and the increase in control of their government could lead to a power shift that could be more damaging than beneficial.
The Impact on the Region
The placement of nuclear weapons in Belarus may lead to an increased risk to European security. Putin’s action could lead to NATO states feeling threatened, causing them to respond with force. The potential threat of military conflict, even over potentially minor disagreements, could further escalate tensions in the region and lead to further destabilization.
Furthermore, the placement of nuclear weapons in Belarus could spark the resurgence of the “Cold War” attitude among Russia and the NATO states. This could result in additional economic stresses on those countries, specifically Belarus, as trade and foreign relations will be influenced through the tension.
The Potential Positive Effects
Despite the many negative implications of the placement of nuclear weapons in Belarus, there could also be some positive effects. The placement of nuclear weapons could also be seen as a deterrent for other states to attack Russia or Belarus. As the placement of such weapons implies a greater military presence in the region, this sends a message to those potential rivals that their aggression is not going to be accepted, and hostile actions could lead to more serious consequences.
The placement of nuclear weapons may also lead to an increase in the regional defense budget; with more money to pour into the military, this will lead to more job opportunities, university research opportunities, and more chances for defense company contracts. The potential positive economic effects can also lead to more stability in the region, as people are able to have more job opportunities and more money to pour into their businesses and other projects.
The announcement of nuclear weapon placement in Belarus has caused much discussion and debate in the region, looming as a potential source of great unrest and aggression. Though there are some potential positive economic effects, it is ultimately up to the involved countries to continue the talks and negotiations and focus on reaching an agreement that is mutually beneficial to all parties involved, so that the region can avoid unrest and an escalation in tension. Ultimately, these discussions between Russia, Belarus, and all of their neighbors must remain as diplomatic as possible in order to reach an outcome which is both effective and satisfactory for all countries in the region.
