MEP: Lukashenka’s Future Is in a Jail Cell
- 5.11.2026, 11:29
Europe has woken up and is no longer content to be just America’s “little brother”.
Can Europe take on greater responsibility as the United States withdraws from the continent? What role will Germany play? What future awaits Lukashenka?
The website Charter97.org discussed these and other issues with MEP Lukas Sieper, founder and chair of the centrist Party of Progress and a Member of the European Parliament representing Germany.
— Between school and university you did voluntary military service in the Bundeswehr. How did you come to this decision and how was the experience?
— It was one of the best experiences in my life. It shaped me into the man that I am today. It shaped my character as well as my body. It showed me the value of discipline and camaraderie. Overall, it was a very positive experience.
There were some issues that the German army faced back in the day and still partly faces today, like bad equipment or being a place where a lot of far-right people are attracted to. But it is becoming way better since I left.
I joined the army for three main reasons. First of all, I was a very hot-headed young man at 18 and I was under the impression that it would be good for me to go there and be taught some discipline. I also joined because I wanted to serve my country and society. I felt like this was a better fitting way for me than doing social voluntary service. Last but not least, back in the day I was of the opinion that in our lifetime there would be a big war in Europe. I wanted to have some experience instead of being someone drafted and then sent to the front line. In between then and now, for some time I lost this fear, but unfortunately, in the past few years, it has flared back up. I am convinced that there is at least a possibility, a very real possibility of such a war if we do not support Ukraine.
— Would you encourage more young people in Germany to join military service voluntarily?
— Yes. And I think it should be on a voluntary basis. I think in peacetime, no one should be forced to serve. Even in times of war, that's a very complicated moral discussion. But I think more young people could do it, especially if they would consider taking up arms to defend their country in the case of a war of aggression against Germany. That might not be the majority of today's youth, but there is at least a part of them. It also increases the overall defense readiness of the country if we have a lot of reservists. The best example of this in German history is the state of Prussia, which was very well defended because it had a huge pool of reservists.
— Let's speak about Ukraine. After nearly five years of full-scale war, the brutality of Russian attacks can still shock us: in recent months, the indiscriminate killings of civilians, including children, have intensified. Meanwhile, Ukraine is running short of Patriot interceptors. Is there anything Europe could do to help Ukrainians get through this winter?
— First of all, we should cite the fact that there are Russian drones and missiles violating our airspace as a reason to declare an air defense zone above Western Ukraine. We have very good reasoning: more and more drones and rockets, as Russia says, "veer off course" (but we all know that it's on purpose) and hit our territory. We need to destroy them already in Ukrainian airspace. We should use this as a reason to establish an air defense zone over Western Ukraine and defend the skies of Western Ukraine ourselves thereby allowing Ukraine to focus on the military build-up in that safe zone and to shift their own air-defense resources eastwards.
— Washington is withdrawing 5000 troops from Germany. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has warned the European Parliament that Europe cannot defend itself without the United States. By this logic, a no-fly zone over Ukraine would be out of the question. Is Rutte right?
— No, he's not. I think he's wrong. If we talk about the skills to defend ourselves, you have to think in military scenarios. The only possible adversary, posing a threat of invasion, that we face right now is Russia. If Russia is not even able to beat the Ukrainian armed forces, I am pretty certain they would not be able to beat the combined armed forces of the European Union.
So I think Rutte is wrong. I think we would be able to defend ourselves without the Americans and to defend Ukraine and ourselves without the Americans. Would it be costly? Yes. Would we suffer losses? Yes, indeed. It's war if it comes to this. But the idea that we can never live without the US, I think it's something that Rutte just said to appease Donald Trump.
— If you look over the years, whatever erratic behavior Donald Trump showed, one thing always remains constant: his deference towards Vladimir Putin. And yet only now has he taken Putin's side openly to such an extent that even Republican senators have urged him to reverse the recent diesel deal. This open turn could cost his party dearly in the US midterm elections. In your view, why side with Putin openly now, rather than just wait two more weeks?
— That's a very good question. I think there are two possible reasons. Reason number one is that Trump is just stupid. I don't think he's a smart man who understands the workings of geopolitics. What he understands is the metrics of getting famous through scandals. That's what he is doing all the time: jumping from scandal to scandal, from viral moment to viral moment. The problem with that is you always need to have a bigger scandal the next time to get the attention. So maybe it was just a stupid move by Trump living in his universe.
The second option, which I think is more likely — and it's the same reason why Trump was behaving like he was all those years — is that he's compromised, that the Russians have something on him and force him to play their game.
The Russians always play the long game. You could think that for Putin it is better if Trump has a majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Yes. But one of the major geopolitical victories that the Russians scored in the past years is that they were able to divide Western societies. The US is divided. Europe is also divided: look at what is happening in France, for example. I think, for the long game of the Russians, it's even better if Trump is still president, but the Democrats have the legislative power, because then the country is more divided: the president will do one thing and the legislature will do another thing.
In geopolitics, in this world's great game of chess, we should not forget that the end goal of a move is not always the same as the result of a move at this very moment.
— Interesting. Indeed, back in 2016, Prigozhin’s St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency organized rallies both for and against Trump in the US. In New York, it even staged two opposing rallies on the same day.
— Exactly.
— Let's look at the Trump-Putin diesel deal. Economically, this diesel deal barely registers. Analysts are speaking with one voice: this deal would make little or no dent in global prices. But politically it sets a very bad precedent. If even the United States can make a deal with Putin, other countries may argue that they can too. What should the EU do to counter that sentiment?
— To counter the sentiment — and we are doing that — we can point to a simple fact. What Trump is doing is rewarding an aggressor, a nation which is participating in a multiple-years war of conquest. If we throw ourselves back to a world where the aggressor is rewarded, then it will not be long until everyone suffers. Because then who is keeping China from attacking India? Who is keeping Pakistan from attacking Afghanistan? Who is keeping Ethiopia from attacking Eritrea?
So what Trump is doing is leading the whole globe back to a time of war. We can remind of what has happened. We, as Europeans, know very well the price of this.
The transatlantic partnership, at least for the next two years, is dead. Even if another president, a Democratic president or a normal-minded Republican president one day comes into power, it will never be the same partnership.
It allows us to free ourselves from the role of the little brother that Europe has played for so long regarding the US. If the government in Washington changes one day, we will be partners again, I'm quite certain of that. But for the first time since the end of the Second World War, Europe and the US will be eye to eye and on the same level. That's something that the US will regret, I think, in the long run.
— In 2022 Russian forces invaded Ukraine partly from Belarusian territory. Then in 2023 Lukashenka allowed Moscow to station nuclear weapons in Belarus. Moreover, a Yale study has found that at least 2,442 Ukrainian children were taken to Belarus, where they were subjected to re-education and military training. My question is to you as a scholar of international law. How do you see Mr. Lukashenka's future?
— As a scholar of international law, I would see his future in a jail cell in The Hague, because he is an accomplice in a war of aggression, he is an accomplice in crimes against humanity, he is an accomplice in war crimes and maybe (there are conflicting opinions on that point) even in genocide.
How do I see his future? I would say that is up to the people of Belarus and maybe up to the Ukrainian army. What happens with Lukashenka?, I can not tell you. This man has endless bad qualities and one quality is that he is very persistent in his grip on power. But I hope that the Belarusian people will be free of him pretty soon.