The US is attempting to use the issue of Belarusian fertilizers to weaken Russia's influence over Belarus and encourage Alexander Lukashenko toward a more independent policy. At the same time, concessions on this issue could create additional risks for Ukraine, as the Minsk regime remains an accomplice in Russian aggression. This opinion was expressed in a comment to UNN by Viktor Galchynskyi, former spokesperson for NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine in the Lviv region.
Details
Following a Bloomberg publication stating that the US is allegedly pressuring Ukraine to facilitate the easing of sanctions on Belarusian fertilizers, the topic has once again come into focus. This primarily concerns potash fertilizers, which were one of the key sources of foreign exchange earnings for the Lukashenko regime prior to EU sanctions.
According to Galchynskyi, there is significantly more politics than economics in this story.
"There are more political than economic reasons here. And this issue concerns Belarus. That is, the policy is traditional since ancient times – 'divide and rule.' In order to further weaken Russia now, the Trump administration, or the US administration in general, decided to interest the Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko in this way, so that he would demonstrate his multi-vector policy more and be more independent compared to the Russian Federation,"
He recalled that sanctions against Belarusian potash not only hit the Belarusian economy but effectively tied it even closer to Russia.
"When the sanctions, particularly against potash, were implemented, they didn't so much punish Belarus, which is already very economically dependent on Russia, as they deepened this dependence. Now, given the manifestations of supposed multi-vectorism that Lukashenko is demonstrating, the United States is trying to give him a certain economic space,"
According to him, Minsk is already demonstrating certain signals toward the West — from contacts with the American administration to the release of individual political prisoners.
"There are many concessions. But the question is whether it will work. Yes, to some extent it will work. But will it give Lukashenko the opportunity to be independent? Probably not,"
Will the EU agree to ease sanctions?
The expert doubts that even in the case of political pressure, the European Union will quickly agree to lift restrictions. According to him, the problem lies not only in sanctions but also in the logistics of Belarusian exports.
"Belarus cannot implement a full release from sanctions because it has only three routes for exporting fertilizers. The first is through the ports of the Russian Federation, which Russia will regulate as it sees fit. The second and third are Poland and Lithuania, which are European Union countries that support sanctions against Belarus as an accomplice to aggression,"
At the same time, he believes that US pressure specifically on Ukraine looks logical from the perspective of international politics.
"We have already had precedents. Who will impose sanctions against Ukraine's enemies if Ukraine itself does not impose sanctions first? Therefore, the actions of the US administration here are absolutely logical. They are saying, let us convince you now, and then you will try to convince Europe,"
However, in his opinion, Ukraine is unlikely to make such concessions in the near future.
"I think that despite the pressure, Ukraine will not make these concessions in the near future,"
Lukashenko is balancing, but risks for Ukraine remain
Galchynskyi drew attention to Minsk's contradictory policy. On the one hand, Lukashenko is trying to improve relations with the West, and on the other, he continues actions that create military risks for Ukraine.
"On the one hand, Lukashenko is trying to establish good relations with the West and gain the opportunity to earn foreign exchange revenue. And on the other hand, he is doing the exact opposite – closing forest areas on the border with Poland and Ukraine, developing road and military infrastructure near the Ukrainian border,"
The expert emphasized that there is currently no strike group on the territory of Belarus, but this does not mean the situation cannot change quickly.
"This does not mean that there won't be one tomorrow or the day after. There is the history of escorting drones, there is the relay infrastructure that allows Russia to use the airwaves. If we give in to this now, we will be nurturing a second aggressor,"
In his opinion, any economic concessions to Minsk now would look like a sign of weakness for Ukraine.
"Ukraine is not currently in a position to make such compromises, even with the US,"
Can fertilizer transit become a security guarantee?
Commenting on the possibility of allowing the transit of Belarusian fertilizers through Ukraine in exchange for reducing military risks from Belarus, Galchynskyi called such a scenario theoretically possible but unrealistic under current conditions.
"This is a very good dream. And I will say more – it could be absolutely real. Ukraine and Belarus could even return to economic cooperation. But there is one 'but' – that is Alexander Grigoryevich Lukashenko,"
He explained that the key problem lies in who would become the beneficiary of the funds from such transit.
"There is no large private business in this sector in Belarus. The key enterprises related to fertilizers are state-owned. And this means that the beneficiary of the foreign exchange earnings will be the Lukashenko regime,"
In his opinion, Ukraine cannot trust Lukashenko right now.
"We cannot fully trust Alexander Grigoryevich. That fantastic story we modeled could only be real after a change of power in Belarus,"
The role of Belarusian fertilizers on the global market
Galchynskyi believes that Belarusian fertilizers are important for the global market but are not critical.
"Belarus was never a monopolist. The entry of Belarusian fertilizers into the market will help increase supply slightly and lower prices a bit. But the experience of sanctions has shown that these products are not critical for the global market,"
He compared the situation to the oil market, where the impact of sanctions is much stronger.
"This is not like the situation with oil, where any instability instantly affects global prices. Here, the effect is significantly smaller,"
Can Ukraine return to the fertilizer market?
According to Galchynskyi, Ukraine was previously a serious player in the fertilizer market, but due to the cost of gas, production became economically unviable.
"Ukraine definitely produced fertilizers. But it is an extremely resource-intensive and gas-intensive process. Ukraine was a serious player when it had access to cheap gas,"
After the rise in energy prices, production decreased significantly.
"As soon as the price of gas reached market levels, production became unprofitable and began to wind down,"
At the same time, he does not rule out that Ukraine may be able to return to this market in the future.
"If Ukraine has its own resources, develops fields, or has access to competitive gas, then there will be a chance to restore fertilizer production,"