Nikolai Statkevich: The Kremlin Is Preparing To Open A “Belarusian” Front
- 30.07.2026, 7:53
The price Lukashenko may have to pay for “keeping the party going” could be the fate of our state, our nation, and millions of Belarusians.
Belarusian opposition leader and former political prisoner Nikolai Statkevich discussed in detail on his Telegram channel, discussed in detail the possibility of an attack on Ukraine from Belarusian territory:
In a post on this channel dated May 19, I examined options for Moscow to continue the war against Ukraine:
Mobilization;
Expanding the front lines to include Belarus;
The use of tactical nuclear weapons.
I’ve already analyzed the prospects for these options in that article, but now there’s a lot of additional information that suggests which option the Kremlin is leaning toward for continuing the war. At least for now.
Russia is preparing for a new mobilization following the parliamentary election campaign in September.
According to various estimates by Ukrainian military analysts, between half a million and one million new soldiers could be mobilized in Russia, who will begin heading to the front as early as November.
The Ukrainian side also claims that intensive construction of military infrastructure is underway in Belarus near the border with Ukraine. Given this, it can be predicted that Moscow plans to send part of its troops into our territory in order to once again attempt to attack Ukraine from the north and, at the very least, divert its military forces from other directions to the “Belarusian” front. It may also attempt to repeat the 2022-style breakthrough toward Kyiv.
The latter, given the marshy terrain along most of the Belarusian-Ukrainian border and Ukraine’s advantage in drones, has little chance of success. However, from our territory, Russian troops will be able to launch massive, high-precision airstrikes against Ukraine using drones and missiles to force it to surrender.
In response, Ukrainian forces will begin launching massive strikes against Russian military communications, equipment, warehouses, command centers, and deployment sites on our territory. Our roads, bridges, cities, military facilities, and petrochemical plants will come under attack. This is especially true within the range of Ukraine’s currently most effective Hornet medium-range drones equipped with artificial intelligence—up to 150 kilometers from the Ukrainian border. This zone includes Gomel, Brest, Mozyr, Pinsk, and numerous smaller cities and towns.
If Russian troops once again begin striking Ukraine’s energy infrastructure—as they did last winter, including from our territory—we will receive a “mirror” response — long-range strikes on similar targets across the entire territory of Belarus.
Destruction of buildings in populated areas, industry, and infrastructure; civilian casualties; major cities without electricity or heat—this will be the price even for merely passive complicity in the aggression. And then there are the consequences of the very presence of foreign troops on our soil during wartime.
Soldiers who know that death awaits them in the Polessye swamps and who want to “let loose” one last time. And who are convinced that the entire local population is obligated to fulfill their every whim in exchange for “protection from Ukrainian Nazis.” Especially since they face virtually no consequences for murdering, robbing, and raping local residents. After all, even if the case goes to trial—which is highly doubtful—they’ll be sent back to the front instead of going to prison.
Belarus has already experienced a prolonged presence of Moscow’s troops on our territory during the Russo-Belarusian War of 1654–1667, which Russia later sheepishly referred to as the “Polish War,” even though more than half of the Belarusians perished in it. I won’t go into all the horrors of that war here—describing them would take an entire book. But I will give one example.
In 1654, Moscow troops laid siege to Mogilev. The siege was short-lived, as the predominantly Orthodox residents themselves opened the city gates to their co-religionists. However, later, after getting to know their “brothers in faith” better, in 1661, these peaceful people rose up in rebellion and almost completely wiped out the 7,000-strong garrison of the “liberators.”
Well, in the current situation, there are also long-term consequences, because withdrawing Russian troops from our land—even after a peace treaty is signed between Russia and Ukraine—will be extremely difficult. Having failed to capture a large country, they may decide to annex at least a smaller one to justify the deaths and injuries of hundreds of thousands of their soldiers in the eyes of ordinary Russians and to be able to declare this a victory.
Undoubtedly, the ruling regime in Belarus is resisting as best it can to avoid such a scenario. But with total dependence on Moscow, it is becoming increasingly difficult to refuse to fulfill its “allied” duty. Sooner or later, the price must be paid for decades of clinging to power. Such perks don’t come for free.
The previous price we paid—our language, history, and culture—merely laid the groundwork and whetted the appetite for the complete absorption of what is now an “artificial nation that speaks the same language as we do.” All the more so because Moscow needs new soldiers and a military foothold for its next wars.
So now, the price for “keeping the party going” for a single family could be the fate of our state, our nation, and millions of Belarusians.