"The Role Of The Prime Minister In Belarus Can Be Compared To That Of A Trolleybus Driver."

• 21.06.2026, 11:27

On Turchin's first year "on the job" as head of the government.

In March 2025, Alexander Turchin became the eleventh prime minister of Belarus. A year later, “Solidarnast” assessed his performance at the helm of the government.

Dmitry Kruk: “The role of the prime minister in Belarus can be compared to that of a trolleybus driver”

BEROC Senior Research Fellow Dmitry Kruk commented in “Solidarnast” noted:

— The role of the prime minister in Belarus can be compared to that of a trolleybus driver. Yes, it matters who’s behind the wheel—it depends on them how fast the trolleybus moves and how smoothly. At the same time, the route is set, and it cannot be radically changed.

And, it must be said, Belarus’s recent prime ministers—especially over the past six years—initially accepted the rules of the game proposed to them when they agreed to their appointments. I’m sure Turchin understood very well what he was getting into and what was expected of him.

In the past, during the period of pseudo-liberalization, he had cultivated an image as a supposedly liberal-minded person (in 2018–2019, Turchin served as first deputy prime minister in Rumas’s government—S.). But, in my view, this did not quite correspond to reality. And we see that, as prime minister, Turchin has accepted the rules of the game, which today consist of an excessive reliance on Russia and a high degree of state intervention in the economy.

At the same time, Turchin tried to make minor adjustments within the framework of this model. For example, as soon as he took office, he attempted to make small cosmetic changes to ease the price regulation decree.

These changes were implemented, but then there was a reversal. In my view, this is a very typical story.

Turchin and his subordinates have no ambition for substantial change; they simply “carry out” the general agenda. But somewhere within it, quietly and behind the scenes, attempts are being made to limit the most glaring examples of absurdity.

But this is unlikely to have much of an effect. Turchin’s personal contribution to last year’s figures (GDP for 2025 grew by 1.3%—S.), as far as I can tell, was minimal. The government may plunge the economy into a deep recession, but as far as growth is concerned, perhaps only one or two tenths of a percent of GDP depends on its actions.

It’s more a matter of luck here—which economic cycle a given prime minister happens to be in. When the economy recorded its highest growth in the past six years in 2023–2024 (3.9% and 4%, respectively—Ed.), no one claimed that this was due to Golovchenko’s efforts.

Therefore, on the one hand, there is no disappointment with Turchin’s performance as prime minister: because there were no expectations to begin with. On the other hand, there is nothing that could be cited as an achievement for Turchin. He and his predecessors set the bar for their own ambitions very low.