Belarus

Madam President, distinguished ladies and gentlemen.

This year's general political debate theme is "Better Together: 80 years for peace, development and human rights." An excellent theme. The key word is "together." Let us together recall everything and reflect. I am certain we will find the true root causes of the challenges and threats the planet faces today.

First: the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory.

Eight decades ago a bloody and merciless war ended, a war that became an immense tragedy for all of humanity. And only at the cost of millions of lives and broken destinies did we overcome this challenge.

The contribution to the Great Victory made by the United States and Great Britain, as well as by the Chinese people, who threw off the yoke of Japanese militarism, is evident. However, the decisive role was played by the feat of the Soviet people — a multinational people who fought to the last drop of blood for their own freedom and the freedom of oppressed peoples. Note: they did not hand the keys of their cities to the conquerors, did not hide behind pro-Nazi collaborationist regimes, did not supply the Nazi regime with equipment and soldiers. At that time — 80 years ago — this was obvious. In the capitals of Europe the liberators were met with flowers and joy. Monuments and memorials were erected to them, avenues and cities were named after them. Only 80 years have passed — 80 years of a well-fed and peaceful life in Europe. And how everything has changed.

What do we see now? In the West its own "truth" about the events of those years has appeared. Memory is being erased, monuments demolished, history textbooks rewritten. Once again, on the streets of cities, time and again we hear Nazi slogans and calls. This is how the generation of the 21st century is being raised — a generation that did not see the horrors of that war and did not even hear about them from their parents. And so it is fed on the false heroism of its ancestors, who once joined Hitler's coalition of nations dreaming of world domination.

Further: if history is being rewritten, then its outcomes are being rewritten too. This calls into question the very correctness of the post-war world order established on the universal principles of the UN — an order that was, it seems, forced upon them for a certain period. Well, the collective West was then forced to share the burden of responsibility for the fate of the planet with what we might call the Soviet bloc. It had to set aside, for a time, its thoughts of world domination. But — to wait. To wait for revenge, in order to turn everything upside down. Look: from this very rostrum it has already been said that the Holocaust is "our common shame." Why "our common"? We, for example, Belarusians, fought Nazism to the last drop of blood and died. We saved Jews at the cost of our own lives.

And we cannot stay silent about this today. We remember the hundreds of villages burned together with their inhabitants, the millions torn apart and mutilated, the hundreds of thousands of children and women driven into European slavery. That is why we understand that preserving memory is important so that history does not repeat itself — so that there will never again be national ideologies of racial superiority, which leave no place for entire peoples, and no more hatred and concentration camps — that horrific invention of the West.

For 80 years now the Belarusian people have lived in peace. And looking at our history, that is an incredibly long time. Belarusians have never lived as well, with such dignity, and under such peaceful skies as in the last 30 years, during which, under the leadership of our President, we have successfully been building a socially-oriented state in the interests of the ordinary person — all while sacredly preserving the memory of the terrible tragedy of the Second World War and passing that memory on to younger generations. Why do so many others around us, especially to the west of our border, not want to live this way? The answer is simple: politicians' eyes are clouded by personal ambitions. Behind those ambitions they no longer see ordinary people. And that is why they treat human life with such contempt, calling on Ukraine to fight virtually to the last Ukrainian.

Next: this year is also significant for the UN, which is celebrating its 80th anniversary. The Organization was created by the victors of that bloody war. We remember that Belarus was among the very first of its founders — a country where one in every three people was killed, tortured, or burned. And throughout all these years the Belarusian delegation has been one of the most reliable supporters of strengthening the foundations of the UN, initiating the boldest peace-loving initiatives, forged by history's suffering. That is why we have the right to speak plainly about the state in which our Organization arrives at this anniversary. I would like to note three key milestones.

First, it is indisputable that the UN remains the central element of international life. This has been possible thanks to its unquestionable legitimacy, universal membership, and comprehensive agenda. However, we observe that the principle of universality has been seriously undermined, especially over the last decade, by those who persistently try to turn the UN into an instrument for realizing their own interests — contrary to the aspirations of humanity.

Second, indeed, the UN keeps the planet from a new world war. Its key mechanism — the Security Council — allows the great powers to discuss questions of war and peace at the negotiating table rather than on the battlefield. However, unfortunately, this body is being used less and less. Its influence on world affairs is no longer what it was. And, let us say it plainly, the UN has proven unable to prevent many of today's bloody regional conflicts. And the trend is only worsening.

Third, under the auspices of the UN a vast network of international structures has been created and a great many legal instruments have been developed. This "infrastructure" is supposed to make effective cooperation possible across the whole spectrum of human activity. But on closer inspection, only some of the UN's structures remain genuinely functional, genuinely carrying out their tasks.

Why is this happening? It is obvious. The Organization must keep pace with the times. This makes reform necessary — first and foremost, reform of the UN Security Council. I am speaking of expanding the category of permanent members to include developing countries.

Over eight decades the Organization's membership has grown many times over, and many states that were not even on the map of the world when the UN was founded now want their opinion and voice to be taken into account. And they have every right to this, since today they are important political and economic actors. They rightly expect the UN to work in the interests of all its members and to strengthen cooperation among them, rather than being an instrument of manipulation in the hands of individual countries — including for settling scores with other states.

Fourth, we also see a problem in the fact that the UN has become heavily "instrumentalized." And the actions of the United States in reducing its support for the UN are a very unpleasant signal — but, you must agree, not without grounds. Either the UN is not fulfilling its functions overall, or it is not fulfilling them the way American interests require. In principle, it does not matter which. The crisis is plain to see.

The main conclusion: if the Organization can renew itself in step with the times and be an impartial forum, it will be needed by all — the strong and the weak, the developed and the developing alike. Otherwise, it faces the fate of the League of Nations. Belarus does not want this, since it does not yet see an alternative to the UN. That is precisely why, today as well, we speak candidly about these institutional problems — in order to understand their nature and correct them.

And one more thing: the 50th anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act. This document, initiated, incidentally, by the leadership of the Soviet Union, enshrined the realities that had taken shape in Europe after the Second World War. Moreover, the Act predetermined the "stable" character of relations between the Soviet Union and the United States, which was reflected in every region of the world and thereby helped make the Cold War "manageable."

The most important legacy of the Act also lies in the fact that it introduced into practice the principle of the indivisibility of security, adherence to which kept the Cold War from turning "hot."

The Helsinki accords offered the possibility of building a united, indivisible, and prosperous Europe both during and after the end of the Cold War. However, history took a different path. The so-called "winners" of the Cold War have today completely "forgotten" this principle and adopted instead the logic of supremacy and confrontation. Incidentally, it was precisely this logic that lay behind NATO's eastward expansion.

As a result, the balance of power in Europe was undermined, and security threats arose for many states. The Yugoslav crisis, the bloodshed in a number of post-Soviet republics, and indeed the conflict in Ukraine are the most vivid examples of these consequences. So too is the recent migration crisis in Europe.

Today it is obvious that the path to ending the bloodshed in Ukraine lies through the return of all parties in Europe to an understanding of the importance of observing the principle of the indivisibility of security. Territories, resources, and other matters play a distant, secondary role here, whatever anyone may try to say.

And it is important that one of the main global centers of power — the United States — fully recognizes the importance of this thesis. Unfortunately, there is no such understanding in the countries of the EU, which continue to fuel the regional conflict with Ukrainian firewood.

This situation especially calls for joint efforts to raise the level of trust between countries, although today there are no ready-made recipes. But we must act. And we — in Belarus, in the heart of Europe — understand this, perhaps, better than anyone. For it is through us that, roughly once every half-century, all the most tragic wars of the modern era have rolled, erasing everything in their path except memory. That is why we say: there can be no delay. Look at what our European neighbors are doing on the EU's border with Belarus and Russia — laying mines, erecting walls, ditches, defensive lines, and barbed wire. They are trying to instill in their own populations a sense of an impending threat from "barbarians" from the East. And there are already first victims — though, notably, among NATO soldiers, who keep drowning in the swamps or blowing themselves up on their own mines.

Yes, on the North Lawn near the UN building, a piece of the Berlin Wall is displayed as a trophy of human rights. And it says so right there: 155 kilometers, and 200 victims over the course of its existence.

Well, today a far larger wall, stretching thousands of kilometers, is being erected on the border of the EU with Russia and Belarus. And the victims along this wall, since construction began, already number in the hundreds. Hundreds of entirely innocent migrants from the countries of the South, who, in search of a better life, make their way toward the EU — the very EU that destroyed the customary way of life in their own countries. Let us, even today, together reserve a spot on that lawn — for the time will come to install a new piece of wall, this time as a trophy to the right to freedom of movement.

Belarus speaks out loudly and proposes concrete solutions. In particular, the President of the Republic of Belarus has put forward the initiative to develop a Eurasian Charter of Multipolarity and Diversity in the 21st Century. The Charter is intended to launch a new paradigm for a Eurasian architecture of equal and indivisible security.

We call on all Eurasian states to join this process and to show the same responsibility that our predecessors demonstrated half a century ago. There is no alternative to such dialogue. We need to rid ourselves of prejudices and sit down at the negotiating table.

Our call, of course, is also addressed to the countries of the European Union, which traditionally view with skepticism any initiative coming from the East. But I would like to remind them: this East is far from what it was even a decade ago. It is, in essence, the Global South, or even the Global Majority, with which one will have to reckon. It is time, finally, to understand that the era of the collective West's dictates has become a thing of the past.

That is why we would advise Europeans to reflect on their place in the world in light of the transformations now under way — transformations that, unequivocally, do not work in their favor.

The decline of economic competitiveness is undermining the traditional European model of the welfare state, lowering living standards, and increasing inequality.

The region's frenzied militarization is driving Europe — especially the newer EU and NATO member states — into a deep financial abyss.

The civilizational foundations of European society are being rapidly eroded as a result of practically uncontrolled mass migration and the failed policy of a false multiculturalism adopted as a response to this challenge.

And all this against a backdrop of ever more fences being hastily erected facing east — fences that are concrete, political, ideological, interpersonal, and, in essence, civilizational.

And what lies beyond that fence for them? There is no longer just Belarus and Russia there. There — all the way to the Pacific horizon, as our Chinese friends put it — a community with a shared future and shared responsibility for the destiny of humanity is taking shape. With weakening customs and physical borders, strengthening cooperation across the whole spectrum of pressing problems, and growing person-to-person contacts and multifaceted interaction. A community where, despite numerous cultural and national differences, people respect one another and do not impose ideological dogmas and rules of behavior on each other. Billions of people, millions of square kilometers of territory, a powerful, fast-growing economy, and the most advanced technologies — already their own. And their own modern mechanisms of cooperation — BRICS, the SCO, ASEAN, and so on.

Therefore, in essence, all this political-militaristic fussing by the EU on its eastern border, together with economic sanctions, amounts to measures of harsh self-isolation, driving the EU countries ever deeper into internal economic and political crisis. Let me repeat, specifically: self-isolation.

If the European elites intend to continue in the same spirit, things will only get worse for the peoples of Europe. Yet all these problems are solvable — if, instead of self-isolation, Europe adopts the concept of Eurasian cooperation and security across our vast continent.

And one more thing: the 25th anniversary of the UN development process. This year we mark another notable date. It is a quarter of a century since, from the rostrum of the General Assembly, some of the greatest hopes and promises in the history of the UN were voiced.

Yes, a full 25 years now separate us from the memorable Millennium Summit, at which the Millennium Development Goals were adopted. It seemed then that with the dawn of the new millennium we were also entering a new era — one of beneficial globalization and universal prosperity.

And where do we find ourselves a quarter of a century later? On the one hand, we have become even more interconnected and interdependent. This is thanks to technological development, which continually transforms our notions of time and space.

But, on the other hand, multiple fault lines have appeared, which completely cross out all this positive picture.

Consider the following figures. In the year 2000 there were roughly 50 million forcibly displaced persons in the world; today there are more than 120 million.¹ More than a billion people on the planet still live in conditions of multidimensional poverty. Conflicts in Ukraine, Palestine, Syria. Post-war syndrome in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and a number of other countries, preventing the peoples of these states from firmly setting out on the path of recovery. Large-scale forcible actions against sovereign countries, entirely outside any legal framework. Trillions of dollars spent on reckless militarization. This is what we have arrived at. Consider just the six and a half decades of the economic blockade of Cuba, a country that, with absolutely no basis, has also been declared a sponsor of terrorism. In the same category is the story of an alleged drug threat from Venezuela — utterly baseless and unacceptable.

Is this really the result the UN system was striving for? We do not think so.

So why have the hopes and expectations of the start of the millennium not been fulfilled? In this regard, the words of the President of Belarus, spoken at that memorable Millennium Summit, have proven prophetic: "For many centuries a small group of states has determined the fate of the world, regarding the rest of the nations and peoples as a rightless mass." What has changed?

The past quarter century has shown that many in the West have simply been unable to abandon their centuries-old mentality. That is why the West has become not a leader in the process of change, but a source of threats and losses.

Certain Western elites, accustomed to living for centuries at the expense of others, continue to harbor a — modernized, perhaps, but still colonial — inertia of thinking. It is no surprise that, even today, they continue to display toward developing countries the same haughty arrogance and use of force that was characteristic of colonial times.

That is why, over the past quarter century, we have seen from the West not joint work to solve the problems of development, but the imposition of "democracy" and the "weaponization" of the economy. This policy has spawned numerous wars, chaos, millions of refugees; it has created barriers in international trade, undermined global food security, and entrenched poverty, hunger, and inequality. And international organizations, first and foremost the UN and the World Trade Organization, have been pushed aside.

This is precisely why, as a reaction to these negative trends, the idea of regionalization is becoming popular, and cooperation mechanisms not tied to Western countries — such as BRICS, the SCO, ASEAN, the CIS, the EAEU, the Arab League, and others — are growing and strengthening. These structures, which reflect the interests of the countries of the Global Majority, function on the principles of mutual respect, equality, and consensus, rather than domination and plunder. In essence, they are shaping a just, multipolar architecture for development. And it is entirely fitting that a most timely initiative — the Global Governance Initiative put forward by President Xi Jinping of China — has emerged, one that Belarus fully supports.

Madam President,

Today, more than ever, the words of the great Italian thinker of the last century, Antonio Gramsci, who wrote from a fascist prison, ring true: "The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born."² Indeed, it is paradoxical that even today the new world is being born in agony, because the old world is unwilling to leave the stage peacefully.

And, yes, it is not we who are destroying the old world. The West itself is doing very well at that on its own. But it is we — the Global Majority — who are building the new one! And I would emphasize especially: together. Together with our like-minded partners!

Thank you for your attention.

---

¹ From the briefing by UN High Commissioner for Refugees F. Grandi to the UN Security Council, 28 April 2025.

² "The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born" — quotation attributed to Antonio Gramsci.