What does Donald Trump really want? Opinions vary on this matter. Some say that the U.S. president has declared war on the deep state and that his administration is planning a revolution in global politics. Others believe that Trump is implementing a plan of revenge against the European elites as he did not fit into their liberal camp during his first presidential term. There are also quite amusing opinions. Some say that Trump admires the leaders of Russia and China and is willing to go an extra mile to be friends with the countries.
In fact, the same question - what Trump wants and whose side he is on - was asked eight years ago, when he first entered the White House. Even then, Europe was anxious. But in Russia, many people were looking forward to reset the relations with the United States.
Then, in February 2017, Belarusian leader Aleksandr Lukashenko gave, as time has shown, the most realistic assessment of Trump, calling him, first of all, a pro-American president who will act in the interests of his country. “One should understand that America has elected a pro-American president, not a pro-Russian or pro-Belarusian one. He is not dumb as some want to portray him. He is yet to gain experience,” the head of state noted.
At the same time, the Belarusian president made a very important remark: Belarusians and Russians should build their own lives themselves rather than rely on America.
The assessments voiced by the Belarusian leader eight years ago have not lost their relevance today. Except that Trump has gained political experience during this time and brought a very unorthodox team to the White House. Based on this, we will try to understand what the new U.S. administration aims for and how its policy will influence things globally, regionally (in Europe), and locally (at the borders of Belarus).
The world has changed, and that is a fact
We live in a very challenging but interesting time. The contours of the future world order are actually taking shape before our eyes. All regions of the world - Europe, Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America - are influencing this process in one way or another. But three heavyweights - Russia, China and the United States - will remain the centers of gravity in the international arena in the near future. It is likely that of this triangle will develop a set of rules of the new world order.
As for Moscow and Beijing, the two have maintained dialogue for a long time. In this regard, we recall the landmark meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in March 2023. At that time, the Chinese leader said the words that now seem symbolic. “Right now there are changes – the likes of which we haven't seen for 100 years – and we are the ones driving these changes together,” the Chinese president told Putin as he stood at the door of the Kremlin to bid him farewell. The Russian leader agreed.
Two years later, with the arrival of Trump, conditions are ripe for the United States to join Russia and China at the negotiating table. The contacts between Trump and Putin, the meetings in Riyadh and Istanbul, the U.S. resolution on Ukraine at the UN, Beijing's welcoming of the talks between Moscow and Washington… All this can be interpreted as a search for common ground. In the same vein, Trump's tariff manipulations towards China, juggling the topic of anti-Russian sanctions and military aid to Ukraine can be seen as a classic U.S. move to raise the stakes before entering the negotiating track.
To dispel any over-expectations and to avoid naive optimism, we need to make one point about the United States from the start. Superpowers like the United States will never change their nature as leaders and dominators. The Americans aggressively push their interests and believe in their own exceptionality. The international community has been witnessing this modus operandi for decades.
Dominance is at the heart of the U.S. vitality. Being on top, the US is able to maintain the monopoly of the dollar, siphon resources from third countries, impose their ideology and shut the mouths of those who do not comply. The United States sees competition as a threat to its dominance. With those who are weaker and who recognize the leading role of the United States, the Americans are able to get along. But in relation to those who are in the same weight category with the U.S., the U.S. elites have a kind of protective instinct - instead of building constructive relations, the U.S. tries to eliminate the competitor. This is what happened, for example, in relations between the U.S. and the European Union, whose economy the United States has been dismantling for several years.
One should not harbor any illusions about the United States. However, many things in the U.S. politics have begun to change. This is especially noticeable when comparing the working methods of the two administrations - Joe Biden and Donald Trump.
Biden's main mistake
The contrast in the policies of the former president and the current U.S. leader has stunned many. The fact that Trump has his own style is not news. But what Trump's team is doing now is not a new style, it is a new strategy.
The Biden administration acted in the realities of the unipolar world or, more precisely, according to the unipolar world rules, But the realities had already changed by the time Biden came to power and new centers of power began to emerge in the world. Biden's main mistake was that he used outdated methods that no longer work in today's world. Probably, the administration of the former president realized that a big transformation was coming, and the US was losing its leading role. It is quite possible that the Ukrainian project was launched with the purpose of rewinding things back - to weaken Europe and Russia and strengthen its own positions. But the opposite happened.
At some point, the U.S. overreached and accelerated the processes of transformation in the world. By weaponizing the dollar, freezing Russian assets, and disconnecting Russian and Belarusian banks from SWIFT, the Biden administration pushed non-Western countries to switch to national currencies, create alternative payment systems, and develop joint solutions to counter interference by the United States and its allies.
Suffice it to recall the story of the price ceiling cap on Russian oil in 2022. Believing that the U.S. had the right to set rules in the hydrocarbon market, Biden demanded that oil-exporting countries increase oil production. Yet, OPEC+ members made the opposite decision, reducing the output. The situation when the leaders of the UAE and Saudi Arabia refused to hold telephone talks with Biden, who wanted to discuss the possibility of increasing oil production, or when the Indian authorities refused to meet with a British delegation that wanted to convince New Delhi to join the anti-Russian coalition, was no less indicative.
The changes in the world began long before Biden came to power, but it was under Biden that they became especially noticeable. And the trigger was the proxy war in Ukraine and the West's policies that violated every imaginable and unimaginable rule of the world order.
Trump as an anti-crisis manager
In essence, the US created chaos by its own actions and lost control over it. Now new elites came to power in Washington. This is a group of people who are able to look more realistically and pragmatically at the world and at the situation in which the United States finds itself.
Unlike Biden, Trump understands perfectly well that the world is living in a new way. Instead of holding on to the old, as most European leaders are doing, the current U.S. president is ready to adapt to the new environment. The fact that it was Trump who won the presidential election could be a very important step forward for the United States. And most importantly, a timely one.
Trump is, first and foremost, a businessman. And, as we know, nothing adapts to change as quickly as business. The current U.S. administration is well aware of the problems that have accumulated in the country, including the record-high national debt, the dedollarization process in the world or the rejection of U.S. treasury bonds.
Both Trump and his teammate Elon Musk have repeatedly stated that the U.S. economy is heading towards the edge of the abyss. They realize that at this stage the US is in dire need of a reset. Therefore, Trump in a way acts as an anti-crisis manager.
However, there is a feeling today that the new U.S. administration sometimes acts like an elephant in a china shop. Here again, the words of Belarusian leader Aleksandr Lukashenko, who compared Trump to a bulldozer, come to mind. The Belarusian president, being an experienced politician, who, like Trump, has always proceeded from the national interests and managed to carefully navigate the country through the most powerful geopolitical storm, today advises his American colleague to cool down a bit and act consistently, showing political wisdom and flexibility.
"Today the United States needs to cool down, calm down and do what they have promised," Aleksandr Lukashenko noted in a recent interview with American blogger Mario Nawfal. The president emphasized that politics does not like pandemonium and what is needed today is not shocking statements, but concrete results.
Perhaps in business, especially amid fierce competition, you need to act like a bulldozer. But the world of politics lives by different rules. And the new U.S. administration has yet to find a balance.
That said, during Trump's term, the economic agenda will most likely prevail over the political one. We can already assume that Trump's main goal is to make America rich again. Or at least economically stable. And if Trump succeeds, the next U.S. president, be it J.D. Vance or someone else, will certainly strive to make America great.
Triangle of power
Relations between the world’s three superpowers - Russia, China and the United States - cannot be simple by definition. One way or another, they will not avoid a clash of interests. The path towards cooperation will be affected by the legacy of their previous interaction: primarily by the crisis of trust between Moscow and Washington, and by global competition between Beijing and Washington.
Reconciliation is likely to be a bumpy road. Russia, China and the United States will push for their interests, compete, fight for primacy and look for leverage. However, under their current leaderships, the three states are likely to look for compromises, negotiate, make joint decisions and take into account each other's red lines. These lines, as well as the contours of the future world order, will probably be discussed within the framework of the Russia-China-USA triangle.
The convergence of positions and the development of common rules cannot be fast. But it is important that this process is launched. Judging by their recent statements, Moscow, Beijing and Washington understand perfectly well that political confrontation and military escalation are taking our world to the abyss. Thus, we need to turn around and face each other.
But that's a very general concept. And if we talk specifically about the United States, we should expect persistent attempts by Washington to wedge itself between Moscow and Beijing. Both Trump himself and his entourage have repeatedly stated that an alliance between Russia and China could pose a threat to the United States. Probably, the Americans realize that pulling Russia over to their side and being friends with Moscow against Beijing is an unattainable task. Therefore, the likely goal of the United States will be to strengthen ties with Russia, primarily economic ones, which Washington can consider as a kind of guarantee that Moscow will not join an anti-American alliance.
As far as relations with China are concerned, the Americans will face quite a challenge. As U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it, Washington views China as its most formidable rival in the world. "What we cannot have is a world where China is so powerful, we depend on them. And that’s right now where we’re headed, unfortunately," Rubio said at the end of February.
The USA under Trump has already launched an economic offensive against China. This applies to trade tariffs and attempts to cut off trade routes for the Chinese. Ahead is the expansion of the U.S. presence in the Indo-Pacific region. But it is worth mentioning that China is not Canada, not Mexico, not Germany. China is a superpower just like the USA. Washington will try to strong-arm its main rival, but will face a blow-back. And if ambitions do not prevail over reason, a balance will be found over time.
What could underpin this balance? Probably an agreement that the two sides of the triangle will not form an alliance against the third. Both the Russians and the Chinese have been consistently trying to convey this idea to Washington.
In early March, Assistant to the U.S. President and Special Presidential Envoy for Russia and Ukraine Keith Kellogg said that the growing alliance between Russia, China, North Korea and Iran was a "global problem". Almost immediately, Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi responded. "China and Russia have found a path of non-alliance, non-confrontation and not targeting any third party in developing their relations," the Chinese diplomat said.
Russia and China have indeed found a way for peaceful coexistence, and their interaction is a win-win for both countries. The Americans, with their superpower mentality, struggle to understand such a concept of coexistence. But they will have to change their ways unless they want to push Russia and China even closer to each other.
Why is Europe so desperate?
As for the relationship between the USA and Europe, it resembles a layer cake. To understand its logic, you need to peel back each layer. But let's start with what lies on the surface.
Since Trump came to power, Europeans have been experiencing one shock after another. U.S. tariff policy, Washington's plans for Greenland, Vice President J.D. Vance's Munich speech, Trump-Putin phone calls, berating of Zelensky in the White House, the mineral deal with Ukraine, the suspension of military aid to Kiev, exclusion of Europeans from Ukraine peace talks, ambiguous statements by the American president about further U.S. interaction with NATO...
Does Europe have reasons to feel anxious about it? Definitely. But it is not Trump's fault. After all, Trump is not the leader of Germany, France or Great Britain and does not sit in Brussels. Trump is the president of the United States, and his job is to defend the interests of the Americans. European countries have their own leaders - presidents, chancellors, prime ministers. These people are responsible for protecting the interests of their countries and peoples. And if European leaders are now pointing fingers at the United States, this only shows their incompetence and inability to efficiently run their countries.
There have been many jokes about Biden and his effectiveness as president. But perhaps the biggest joke is that it is Europe that became dysfunctional under Biden. Over the past few years, European elites, under the guidance of Washington, have been pushing their countries into the abyss of multiple crises. By the way, the term "multiple crises" is most often heard in relation to Germany, whose economy was considered the locomotive of the European Union until recently.
If you look at the actions of the United States from the European perspective, you can understand the reasons for this overwhelming confusion, fear, and resentment. Europe is divided politically, weakened economically, and broken morally, it is no longer a force that could unite countries and lead. Until recently, Europeans saw such a leader in the United States. It is not surprising that in recent years, the term "collective West" has been increasingly used instead of the concept of "united Europe". But Western collectivism came apart when the slogan "America First"was proclaimed by Washington.
If you look at the situation from the U.S. perspective, the actions of the Trump administration seem to make perfect sense. The United States today has its own "multiple crises" to deal with. Trade tariffs, Trump's ultimatums, America’s attempts to foist American LNG on Europe, efforts to explore possibilities for rapprochement with the Russian Federation, and even the shocking statements on Greenland - all of this represents attempts to further U.S. economic agenda.
Of course, the Americans sometimes overuse aggressiveness, but this is their way of doing business. During his first term, Trump also waged tariff wars. But then Europe had enough capacity to weather the storm. And if it is not strong enough to hold its ground now, this is only because the European economy is rapidly losing its competitive edge. And we have already figured out who is to blame for this.
Trumpists vs liberals
However, economy is just the top layer of the America-Europe pie. Something much deeper is hidden under it. And this is what Trump is challenging. Although it all started before him.
Today, there is a fierce clash in the West between the liberal elites and the right-wing forces. The liberals, who have been resting on their laurels for years, are rapidly losing ground under the onslaught of the "right-wing tsunami". For the ruling elites in Western countries, what is happening is akin to a revolution or a coup d'etat. In fact, the West has already forgotten what a change of power is. Of course, elections took place, but they meant the replacement of one puppet with another. The system itself did not change. That is, the liberal globalists, or the deep state, kept their grip on power.
However, over time, the Western liberal system has exhausted itself. Firstly, it turned out to be incapable of adapting to changes in the world and coping with new economic challenges. In Europe, this resulted in economic and energy crises, a drop in competitiveness, de-industrialization and a decline in living standards. Secondly, the liberal elites seriously miscalculated by betting on a proxy war with Russia. Instead of financial benefits, this undertaking brought huge losses. And while the USA under Biden still reaped certain benefits from arms sales and weakened Europe, it backfired on the EU countries because after imposing sanctions they lost the Russian market and access to cheap resources.
The right-wing forces in Germany, France, Austria, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and others immediately took advantage of the failures of the liberal camp. Criticizing the European authorities and prioritizing national interests, the right-wing and far-right parties, largely seen as pro-people political forces, gained strong support among voters.
Just at that moment, Trump comes to power in the USA. He is seen in European capitals as the main threat to the liberal order. Europeans are partly right here. Musk's aggressive rhetoric toward European elites, J.D. Vance's speech in Munich, the support of Trump and his administration of right-wing and far-right politicians in Europe, the refusal to fund Voice of America and Radio Liberty, the liberals’ “radical propaganda” mouthpieces. Such a policy leaves no doubt that Trumpists are ready to work hard to get rid of liberals both in the USA and abroad.
Therefore, it is not Ukraine or even the confrontation with Russia that is in the foreground for the liberal upper circles in Europe today. It is a large-scale ideological and political war with the right-wing forces. And, of course, with Trump, whose rise to power is giving a boost to the right-wing forces in Europe.
Ukraine is twice a proxy
The political battles between the USA and Europe will affect the entire European region in one way or another. For example, it will be Ukraine, which is being pushed by the European establishment to continue fighting in order to spite the USA.
In fact, the situation with Ukraine is getting more and more unpredictable. Not so long ago, the European top brass and Washington used Ukraine as a proxy force in the war with Russia. Today, Ukraine is becoming a European proxy in a confrontation with the Trump administration.
What does Europe want? To prolong the conflict, to drive a wedge between Moscow and Washington, to provoke Trump to impose sanctions against Russia, to increase arms supplies to Kiev, and to strengthen its military presence in Europe. Probably, it is also an attempt to take Trump down, to show that he is dependent on European allies, and, perhaps, to cause internal turbulence in the USA, where the president's failure on the Ukrainian track will inevitably be used by the Democrats.
Of course, both Washington and Moscow see these back-door games. Therefore, one should not be surprised that at this very stage Europe is kept at a distance from the negotiating table, at least until a firm agreement is reached.
As for the USA, at this stage it is more profitable for the country to end the conflict, and dig into the Ukrainian subsoil or integrate Ukrainian ports into the trade routes, over which the USA is eager to gain control. Today the ownership of the energy infrastructure in Ukraine is also on the agenda. Of course, the USA is also interested in resuming cooperation with Russia, both in economy and geopolitics, as has been recently stated in public.
Moscow looks at the situation from different angles, and for Russia, relations with the USA are by no means confined to the Ukrainian conflict. Russia is interested in building a new security architecture both on the European continent and in the world in general. Since Trump came to power, this dialogue has become possible. Moscow will make the most of this opportunity. Including by involving the USA in joint economic projects, which generally meets the interests of the Russian economy. Therefore, with the current difficult situation with Ukraine and European attempts to escalate it, Russia and the USA will not just have to maneuver on their own, but quite possibly to play as tandem.
Can the liberals win?
Sometimes politics makes such twists and turns that all predictions and logical conclusions can be nullified in an instant. Based on the data available at this moment, we can predict that the current liberal elites will be put through the political meat grinder. On the whole, they are already spinning there.
To assess the prospects of the liberals, it is enough to ask one question. Can Europe simultaneously be in confrontation with the USA, drive the Ukrainian conflict forward and maintain the sanctions policy against Russia?
Disagreements with the USA will result in trade tariffs and the loss of the USA market for Europeans. That means losses.
Support for Ukraine and the ReArm Europe Plan will require huge financial injections. It should be understood that the weapons will be produced for domestic needs, i.e. Brussels will not be able to make money on them. Militarization plans will inevitably drive the EU into a debt hole, trigger inflation and badly affect the welfare of its citizens. These are once again losses. This is also compounded by political as right-wing forces are unlikely to watch silently as liberals lead their countries to economic collapse.
The EU army and large-scale rearmament make sense only if the member states have the financial capacity. However, all that the EU has today is sanctions, debts and Ukraine, which requires huge financial support. Lifting sanctions, resuming Russian gas supplies, and opening airspace with Belarus and Russia could help revitalize the EU economy. Europeans, however, choose losses again and again.
How long will Europe last this way? Not for long. Trump's team understands this. That is why they are giving Europeans time to rebel, fully realize their incapacity, and come to terms with the place they occupy. Putin's words that Trump will bring order to Europe and European leaders will “stand at the master's feet and wave their tails gently” come to mind here.
Yet, strategically, it would be disadvantageous for the USA to uproot liberals from big politics completely. After all, their place will be taken by right-wing forces, which are quite diverse in their views. Controlling and subordinating them to its interests may be much more difficult than infantile and cowardly liberals. Therefore, it would be more convenient for the USA to try to weaken the liberal elites by replacing them with loyal right-wing forces in some places. For example, it can be done in Germany, where Trump may have plans for the gas transportation system. It is for a reason that Washington is actively flirting with the far-right Alternative for Germany party. However, Trump's actions are much easier to predict in economics than in politics. Therefore, there is no point in getting so far ahead in this matter yet.
The USA will not leave Europe
What we can be sure of is that the USA will never leave Europe and will not give up its influence - neither political nor economic one. Most likely, the USA will retain its military presence there, but make the loyalty of European elites cheaper for the U.S. budget.
First of all, Europe is of interest to the USA as a market for U.S. hydrocarbons. The phrase “drill, baby, drill” became one of the unofficial slogans of Trump's election campaign. The Republican has clearly stated his goals - to increase oil and gas production in the USA, to bring down prices on the domestic market and to make money on LNG exports. Trump even gave the European Union an ultimatum: either Europe increases its oil and gas purchases from the USA, or Washington declares a tariff war on Brussels.
Another topic that is now being actively discussed in the Western media is the U.S. views on the gas transportation system in Europe. In particular, the talk is about the acquisition of the Nord Stream pipelines and other infrastructure to restore Russian energy supplies to Europe. Notably, Putin has recently said that Europe would be able to get cheap Russian gas again if Russia and the USA agree on energy cooperation.
How Russia benefits from resuming pipeline gas supplies to Europe needs no explanation. As for the USA, it is not just an opportunity to get money for transit. If the Trump administration plans to “bring” Russia back to Europe by pulling it away from China, they realize that resuming Russian gas supplies to the European market is inevitable. Both Moscow and Europe will seek this.
Of course, the USA would like to remain a monopoly by selling their LNG to Europeans. In this situation, however, the USA will have to compromise. In any case, the USA will retain its share on the European market. Either by convincing the Europeans that it is necessary to diversify imports, or by threatening them with tariffs because of trade imbalance. The main thing is that in case of acquisition of the pipelines, the USA will remain an intermediary between Russia and Europe, and at the same time it will get a lever of pressure - a gas valve.
The political component in the U.S. approach to Europe should not be ignored. No matter how relations between the USA, Russia and China develop, the Americans will need allies in Europe, who they can use depending on the situation: as proxies, leverage or source of resources.
As far as the U.S. military presence in Europe is concerned, much will depend on the agreements reached with Russia. If these talks are deadlocked, which cannot be ruled out, the United States may increase its military presence on NATO’s eastern flank. If an agreement is reached, the Americans will need to strike a balance between meeting Moscow’s requirements and maintaining its influence in Europe.
The withdrawal of the U.S. troops from the Baltic states has already been discussed in the media. The visit of U.S. Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth to Warsaw and his statements that the United States may increase its presence in Poland have sparked the idea that the Americans are planning to reposition their forces in Europe. They might send more troops to Poland, demonstrating to Europeans their readiness to “stand at the gate” of the Belarus-Russia Union State, and at the same time reduce the number of troops in other European countries, such as the Baltic states, both for cost-saving purposes and to improve relations with Russia. However, judging by the rhetoric of Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his allies, Warsaw has joined the liberal anti-American rebellion. Therefore, the question of maintaining or increasing the U.S. contingent in Poland and consequently at Belarus’ border remains open. Meanwhile, Washington rejected the idea of Polish authorities to deploy nuclear weapons in Poland. Nuclear escalation is not part of the U.S. agenda, even if the relations between the USA and Russia continue to be tense and do not improve.
Regarding rumors about the United States leaving NATO, this is unlikely to happen. Most likely, these rumors are simply a way to convince European allies to increase their defense spending. This is driven by financial considerations such as reducing U.S. expenditures and boosting the sales of U.S. arms to Europe.
What сan Belarus expect?
The future course of events, both in Europe and in the whole world, largely depends on agreements between Russia and the United States and dialogue within the Russia-China-US triangle. We can only speculate about the future based on common sense and potential benefits for all parties involved. It is clear that choosing constructive cooperation over confrontation is in everyone's best interest.
Anyway, the task of any state is to anticipate various scenarios and be ready to defend its interests in any situation. In this regard, Belarus has learned how to stay one step ahead.
For several years, our country has successfully countered economic aggression. Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko has repeatedly stated: “If we have an economy, we have a country.” While leaders of European nations cornered their economies, the Belarusian leadership strengthened the country's position and explored new opportunities despite sanctions. Thanks to these efforts, today we are standing firm amid the ongoing geopolitical turbulence. How many European countries can say the same?
Apart from economic aggression, Belarus has also faced military threats near its borders. However, our country has ensured its own security in many ways. Nowadays, Belarus is accused of being a "co-aggressor" helping Russia and lacking sovereignty in the eyes of the West. But what they fail to mention is that Belarus has received security guarantees from Russia and now has nuclear weapons deployed on its territory. Soon, the Russian missile system Oreshnik will also be deployed here. For this we neither turned our country into a battlefield, as Ukraine did while dreaming of NATO guarantees, nor ruined our economy by urgently rearming the military, as neighboring Poland is doing. Unlike Polish youth, Belarusian young people will not have to work under the burden of paying off billion-dollar debts for weapons that will be obsolete within a few years due to advancements in AI.
Those who speculate on sovereignty should perhaps consult a dictionary to understand the true meaning of this term. They should also reflect on the concepts of allies and vassals and then consider how it came to be that Belarus and Russia became allies, while Europe transformed into a vassal of the United States.
Although Belarus does not seek to be a geopolitical leader or inherently possess any strong leverage, it has managed to strengthen its position and protect its interests. We anticipated that many issues would be resolved within the Russia-China-US triangle. However, it must be understood that each country will rely on its allies and simultaneously represent their own interests. Belarus has close ties at least with two of these countries. We have nothing to argue with Americans about either, provided they do not create threats near Belarusian borders.
This is what Lukashenko said about it back in January: “We do not expect any handouts from the United States, but we do want to cooperate with them. Realizing that it is still the leading country in the world, which has a serious impact on the economy of Belarus, our union with Russia, and the economy of China. It influences the economy of all countries. Why should we quarrel? We are not going to solve global issues with the United States, we know our place."
Our country is capable of cooperation: with the United States, with Ukraine in the future, and even with Poland under reasonable leadership.
For example, in the development of artificial intelligence technologies. Why this particular area? Likely because we are living in an era when a large-scale AI race is imminent. Both the United States and China have already jumped in with both feet. It is no coincidence that during his inauguration Trump announced plans to create the strongest army in the world. It is reasonable to assume that the Americans will develop military technologies using AI. But it is not just about the military. AI technologies are already widely used in medicine, education, industry, mechanical engineering and more. It seems we are moving towards a time when a nation’s power will depend on its AI capabilities.
In the near future, Russia is expected to accelerate its pace in the AI race. Poland has also recently announced plans to invest in artificial intelligence development. But unlike Belarus, they lack even half of our potential. Warsaw tried to lure Belarusian IT specialists, hoping for progress in information technology, but these efforts ultimately failed. Currently, Poland is talking about building their first nuclear power plant. Time passes, but no progress is made. Belarus has already launched AI training programs and its own microelectronic production facilities, such as the Integral holding company. It also has its own nuclear power plant capable of powering large data centers. Plans are in place to construct another one.
Belarus has always focused on long-term goals. While we do not have the vast resources and territories like Russia, the leverage to push our interests like the United States or the economic power like China, we do possess intellect, experience and legacy that we have preserved and develop. We also have reliable friends and allies, with whom we have carefully built relationships over the years. Belarus has chosen its path: the path of creation. The key to our nation's successful development lies in peace in the European region, security at our borders, the ability to cooperate constructively with the West, maintain trust-based and mutually beneficial relations with the East and explore new opportunities in the Global South.
As many other non-Western countries, Belarus is optimistic about the ongoing changes in the world. However, it is also important not to be naive. The new world is not like a Hawaiian beach. In the new world, everyone will need to fight for their place in the sun. Moving towards a multipolar world offers us first of all a wide range of opportunities. And we must not miss them.
Thanks to the efforts made so far, Belarus has a solid foundation that allows it to protect itself from external influence and avoid becoming dependent on the interests of other countries such as the United States. As a result, we find ourselves in a strong position today. The key is to maintain this momentum and keep moving forward. As the president says: "We keep calm and carry on."
Vita Khanatayeva,
BelTA
Follow us on:
