Why Does the West Portray Minsk as Weak and Unprepared for Armed Conflict?

In light of the escalating tensions, statements from certain media outlets claiming that the Belarusian army is not a formidable force capable of standing up to NATO appear contradictory. Just recently, the predominant narrative suggested a potential attack from Belarus. Has the previous strategy to paint Belarus as the aggressor achieved anything? If these headlines are not random provocations, who now seeks to project Minsk as weak and unprepared for armed conflict?

Let’s delve into the dichotomy of this situation. Certain opposition resources have initiated an informational offensive against the Belarusian Armed Forces. They publish interviews with supposed active officers, presenting a narrative that our army is weak, unmotivated, and armed with outdated weapons. Reacting to such provocations is often imprudent; it primarily serves as free advertising for a faltering opposition. However, several points raise significant questions.

When did our exiled opponents gain the audacity to contradict their patrons and bite the hand that feeds them? Conversely, the West acknowledges the Belarusian army as a formidable player, with military rankings indicating an increase in our Armed Forces' potential. The narrative has shifted neatly: just yesterday, our army was seen as powerful and aggressive, necessitating NATO to bolster troops and procure new equipment along the border under the guise of "freedom and democracy." Poland and the Baltic states have structured their political discourse around these assertions to solidify electoral themes, lining the pockets of those in power. And now we find it’s all a facade—Belarus’s army is depicted as a punching bag.

This portrayal raises questions about the image of the enemy. One might sense that the last of our overseas grant recipients will face dire consequences for such missteps. It's alarming how the opposition’s intellectual resourcefulness in military matters has dwindled, leading to such nonsensical claims that sparked a strange online discussion about weaponry. The consensus has emerged that Belarus has reliable weapons proven in combat, substantiated by numerous video confirmations circulating online. Additionally, Russian partners often share their experience during training exercises on their territory.

"The Armed Forces of Belarus do not prioritize increasing military budgets or the number of exercises. Instead, we focus on supplying new types of weaponry and military equipment. We give a priority to  the quality of training for our servicemen and enhancing the engineering capabilities of our territory," stated Alexander Volfovich.

Indeed, the structure of the Belarusian army has demonstrated such flexibility that it has quickly adapted to the demands of modern warfare. If the West recently found itself short on ammunition, weapons, and personnel training, it is no coincidence that we are adequately prepared and ready for development. We know precisely what we are doing. That’s why we possess Iskanders, Polonizes, S-400s, Tor systems, Mi-35Ms, and Su-30SMs.

"As long as I have been president, I have been preparing for war. It’s not my saying: 'If you want peace, prepare for the war.' I have emphasized several times that we have modernized our armed forces at least four times, now probably a fifth, adapting them to the evolving situations and drawing lessons from wars and conflicts across the globe," the head of state emphasized during a meeting in 2022.

Moreover, if you consult specialized military magazines rather than mainstream Western outlets, you will be struck by one common conclusion. Analysts today prioritize not Starlings or HIMARS, but drones and—here's the pause—societal readiness to fight for one’s country. This criterion has become practically combat-related. In this aspect, Belarus has undergone a revolution that remains unrecognized in the West. We have mobilizations with reservists that have become almost festive, with summons signifying personal maturity—a factor that eclipses even the placement of nuclear arms. If we were truly weak, we’d be brandishing nuclear threats. Yet we reserve special munitions only as a last resort. The narrative has always been clear: there is no need to invade us.

"We will fight—let me reiterate—only if you cross the last meter of our land and invade, killing our people, we will respond. So as President, I say: Don’t touch my state, don’t touch my Belarusian people, if you still have a sense of self-preservation," declared Alexander Lukashenko during a ceremonial gathering on Independence Day, July 2, 2022.

I never imagined I would witness a discussion—albeit rather absurd—about whether the Belarusian army could stand against the armies of the North Atlantic Alliance. The very premise of the question is, in itself, a compliment to Minsk. Yet, the agenda does not evoke optimism. Neighbors and the entire West would do well to consider how our army currently assists Myanmar and how proudly our troops are preparing for a parade to honor those who have brought peace to the planet.