Belarus

**Mr President, distinguished delegates,** For 79 years, our countries have gathered in this hall to speak their truths, exchange best practices, and support important initiatives — all under the banner of making the world a better place. But is the world truly becoming better? More predictable, safer, more stable? Among us are long-standing members who remember when the UN played a special role in this. For those of us who are younger, unfortunately, we know this only from textbooks. Many years ago, the UN Charter was something sacrosanct — a true guarantor of compromise and future-oriented decisions. The memory of the victims and horrors of the Second World War was still fresh, and no one wanted a repeat of that dreadful tragedy. That is why together we created a unique instrument for collective dispute resolution and for strengthening the architecture of international cooperation. Yes, history has shown that this instrument is not perfect — like all of us. But it remains the best tool the world has had before and still has today. Not all issues, even those where solutions have long been agreed, have been implemented. They continue to bleed — for example, Palestine, where a full-scale humanitarian catastrophe is now unfolding, with tens of thousands of civilians dying. Nonetheless, the achievements of the 20th century remain. Colonial systems collapsed. Many peoples attained their hard-won right to self-determined development. Economic, industrial, and financial growth centres emerged across all continents. Entire regions began to overcome hunger and epidemics. The UN's peacekeeping activities were once capable of preventing bloody conflicts or helping bring them to an end. The UN's blue flag appeared wherever development goals were being achieved. So what happened? Why did we need to create a **Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter**? Why do we now have to defend a document that already holds the highest legal authority for all? Why can’t we fully use the UN’s instruments to restore order in the world? Because some countries do not live by the norms prescribed in the Charter — and never intended to. For them, living by international law is akin to a slow decline. Yes, on this platform they mention the Charter. But only selectively, and only when it suits their selfish interests — often to criticise others. Let us recall: the universal law of the UN grants everyone — without exception — **equal rights to development**, and **non-discriminatory access to global goods, technologies, and resources**. But is this approach acceptable to the West? No. Its chief interest lies in **preserving dominance** on the planet and ensuring the prosperity of its elites. For this, entire peoples and foreign resources are exploited, and the rest of the world’s development is suppressed. The age-old principle of **"divide and conquer"** remains the root of nearly every modern armed conflict. UN principles are tossed aside the moment they threaten the "vital interests" of the United States and its closest allies. Yet when any state dares to act in the interest of its own people or attempts to reclaim control of its resources, the West suddenly remembers every convention, clause, and footnote — to apply pressure. And of course, they respond with the full suite of **illegal sanctions and coercion**. This is the nature of all so-called **"colour revolutions"** — which bring only suffering and turmoil to ordinary people. This is the West’s "recipe" for a new world order — a recipe, incidentally, heavily seasoned with **NATO weaponry**. --- **Consider this:** nearly 40 countries, home to 2.5 billion people, are under illegal, unilateral coercive measures by the United States and the EU. Many have lived under these for decades — **Cuba** for more than half a century. Such measures flagrantly violate international law and the UN Charter. They illegally impede sustainable development, undermine food and energy security, restrict access to global markets, and violate freedom of movement. They also backfire — hurting ordinary people in the sanctioning countries. In neighbouring EU states, people now protest rising energy and food prices, and face growing social unrest. --- So what is the result? According to American sources, today **72% of the world’s population lives in what they call "autocracies"**. Twenty years ago, by their own reckoning, it was 46%. Has the West’s campaign to remake the world in its image succeeded? The answer is obvious: **clearly not**. The trend is clear: the **free countries of the Global South** reject sanctions, reject interference, reject imposed “democratisation”. They wish to develop **based on their own traditions**, their own understanding of the world, and in the interest of their own peoples. Today they form the **Global Majority**, from which new, peaceful, cooperative ideas and initiatives are emerging — **not against anyone**, but **for the benefit of all**. These include China’s "Belt and Road Initiative", and President Xi Jinping’s global initiatives on **development, security, and civilisation**; the **Belarusian-Russian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity for the 21st century**; India’s "Voice of the Global South" summit initiative — and many others. All these are directed toward building an **international community of shared destiny**, not just for the so-called “Golden Billion”. After all, we have only one planet — and its diversity enriches us all. This is our path. The path of **our President Alexander Lukashenko and our people**. A path based on respect, trust, sincerity, reliability, and responsibility. By the way — in response to the latest illegal sanctions, Belarus opened its borders, unilaterally waiving visa requirements for **all EU citizens**. Thousands have already visited — and were not disappointed. --- **If the UN were more trusted**, most global peace initiatives would be born and nurtured within this Organisation — not outside of it. And we wouldn’t be facing a new **division into geopolitical and economic blocs**. A few words about global conflict potential. We’ve grown used to third-rate fiction films and YouTube clips. We’re conditioned to accept this oversimplified way of consuming information, forgetting truths that humanist writers once captured. So allow me to invoke **three American authors**: 1. From *O. Henry*, in *Cabbages and Kings* — "Tiny operetta nations amuse themselves with the game of governments, until one day a silent warship appears in their waters and tells them: Don’t break the toys." That warship, of course, is American. 2. From *Graham Greene*, in *The Quiet American* — a CIA operative under embassy cover searches for a “third force” to carry out bombings and install a pro-American regime in Vietnam. 3. From *Kurt Vonnegut*, in *A Man Without a Country* — who questioned why, at the end of World War II, when the outcome was already known, **the US and UK firebombed Dresden**, killing over 100,000 elderly, women, and children. We know why: to **intimidate** the future. That same pattern — provocations, third forces, and heavily armed US warships — continues today. --- **This is why we need a strong and impartial UN** — a universal organisation that ensures global balance, so no country or bloc can bend its tools for selfish gain. A strong UN would not allow, in service of transnational capital and Western interests, for Ukraine to be made to fight **to the last Ukrainian**. If more states shared **Belarus’s understanding** of what is truly happening in the conflict zone — and its consequences — they would have helped bring **Russia and Ukraine to the negotiating table long ago**, not supported battlefield escalation. In this context, we welcome initiatives like the **Brazil–China peace plan**. But without **Russia’s involvement**, no initiative will succeed. And **no new regional security architecture** can exist **without Belarus**. Meanwhile, **NATO continues a massive military build-up on our western borders** — tens of thousands of troops, thousands of vehicles. We fear that this “game” may spin out of control, escalating into a **regional or even global conflict with catastrophic consequences**. There is already enough **nuclear weaponry in Europe**. This path leads directly to a third world war. --- Ten years ago, Minsk hosted **effective negotiations on the Ukrainian conflict**. We are again offering **our peacebuilding efforts**, as we understand both Russians and Ukrainians best. **We want peace more than anyone.** For the record: since the conflict began, **over 250,000 Ukrainians** have crossed into Belarus. Recently, 12,000–15,000 monthly. These are official figures. One does not flee “from” prosperous Europe “to” supposed “aggressors”. This is **many times more** than those crossing from Belarus into the EU. The **shameful forced pushbacks of migrants into Belarus** represent another dark chapter in European “democracy”. On our borders, EU soldiers have **beaten, tortured, and killed** migrants from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. Many were buried without names. The **Council of Europe recently condemned** these actions and criticised Poland’s law allowing broader use of live ammunition by its military against refugees. So this is how “enlightened Europe” greets those fleeing conflicts caused by the **West’s interference in sovereign nations**. These actions are **flagrant violations of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention**. The evidence is well documented and will be submitted to the relevant international bodies — though they **should have acted long ago**. --- Therefore, we are concerned about the future of the UN and propose: 1. **Free the UN from the dictate of a few nations** that abuse their power and presumed exceptionalism. The UN is all of us. Secretariat staff must serve the **entire Organisation**, not their countries, and remain **neutral and independent**. 2. The UN must **support regional processes**. Integration frameworks like **BRICS, SCO, CIS, EAEU, African Union, ASEAN**, and others are growing. The UN should engage with and complement them. 3. Last year, Western countries **launched a dirty campaign** to block Belarus from joining the Security Council — fearing our honest voice. Regardless, we will continue speaking out and advocating for **Security Council reform** that includes **major developing countries** from Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Their influence is far greater today than 80 years ago. 4. The UN must take a **firm stand against unilateral coercive measures**. Sanctions must be addressed **systematically**, with objective evaluations of their harm to sustainable development. 5. The UN must be a **platform for addressing transnational threats**: migration, pandemics, disasters, human trafficking, hunger. Trillions spent on arms (as the real-time counter outside this hall shows) should be redirected to address human needs. --- Finally, the UN must be the **voice of states**, not diluted by various non-governmental structures. It is **member states** that bear responsibility for decisions affecting everyone on this planet. --- **Mr President,** This year marks a milestone for Belarus — the **80th anniversary of our liberation from Nazi occupation**, which marked the beginning of our modern, peaceful, nation-building era. Next year, we will all commemorate the **80th anniversary of the founding of the UN**. But in what condition will the world arrive at that anniversary — **in peace or conflict**? That is why President **Alexander Lukashenko has proposed a Global Security Dialogue**. We will keep knocking on the door of “peace and creation”, “security and development”. Since last year, we have hosted in Minsk an international conference on **Eurasian security**, seeking to align political, economic, and other processes across Greater Eurasia. This year’s edition will be held on **31 October**. We invite all to attend. Let us fill the UN’s lungs again with the **spirit of San Francisco**, which gave life to this Organisation. We believe this is urgently needed — for the **good of all people on Earth**. **Thank you.**