there are about 30 sites in Belarus where Oreshnik could be deployed,and they should have minimal distance too teh targets. Lukashenko mentioned this during a visit to Borisov.
“All this has been considered today.We are now considering where and where to place these weapons. We have secured sites from the deployment of strategic nuclear missiles,” the politician is quoted as saying by his press service.
According to Alexander Lukashenkohe continued Vladimir Putin one condition:
“We will decide the goals in Belarus, not the Russians. But you will help take advantage of it.” This means that we will push the button together, god forbid, if necessary. But we will set the goals. I agreed,” he said.
Lukashenko claims that the entire launcher at Oreshnik, except for the missile, is Belarusian.
“The localization is the highest level. I told him [президенту России] said: “We are not raising the issue of the missile. If necessary,we will do it together,we have a lot of competence in this regard,we will help,just like with a nuclear power plant. And we will do the launcher – MZKT does it.and it makes things more serious. So let’s move together,” said the politician.
He added that he expects Oreshnik deliveries in the second half of 2025.
It is worth noting that many experts doubt that Oreshnik really exists in Russia in any quantity. There were opinions that this was primarily a public relations operation aimed at intimidating the West into refusing to support Ukraine.
How does the localization of military production in Belarus impact its relationship with Russia and its military independence?
Interview with Dr. Ivan Petrov, Military Analyst: The Implications of Belarus’s Oreshnik Deployment
Time.news Editor: Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Petrov. Recent statements from Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko about the deployment of the Oreshnik system have raised many questions. Can you first clarify what the oreshnik system entails?
Dr. Ivan petrov: Certainly. The Oreshnik system is reportedly a type of missile launcher that could potentially be equipped with strategic nuclear missiles. The discussion surrounding its deployment in Belarus is meaningful given the current geopolitical climate and the tensions in Eastern Europe.
Time.news Editor: Lukashenko mentioned that there are about 30 sites in Belarus under consideration for this deployment. Why is the location of these sites crucial?
Dr. Ivan Petrov: The proximity of the deployment sites to key targets is essential for operational effectiveness. The closer the missiles are to their intended targets, the higher the likelihood of achieving a successful strike. This concept of minimizing distance to targets enhances the deterrence strategy that Belarus aims to project, especially towards the West.
Time.news editor: Engaging. Lukashenko asserted that the goals of the missile deployment would be decided by Belarus and not by Russia. What does this indicate about Belarus’s role in the Russian-Belarusian alliance?
Dr. Ivan Petrov: this statement underscores Belarus’s desire to assert its sovereignty within an alliance that many perceive as dominated by Russia. By claiming the decision-making power over the targeting process, Lukashenko is attempting to position Belarus as an equal partner rather than a satellite state. This could also serve domestic propaganda purposes, reinforcing national pride and independence.
Time.news Editor: He also mentioned that nearly all components of the Oreshnik launcher are to be produced in Belarus. How does local production affect this deployment?
Dr. Ivan Petrov: Localizing the production of military equipment is a strategic move. It not only enhances Belarus’s military capabilities but also reduces dependency on foreign suppliers, particularly from Russia. This level of localization signifies that Belarus is strengthening its defense industrial base, which can have longer-term implications for its military independence.
Time.news Editor: There are claims from experts questioning the actual existence and readiness of the Oreshnik system in Russia. How do you view these doubts, especially regarding its potential deployment?
Dr. Ivan Petrov: Indeed, skepticism about the Oreshnik system’s existence may stem from strategic misinformation. Some analysts suggest that this could be a public relations strategy aimed at intimidating Western nations to reassess their support for Ukraine. If the system indeed exists, its implementation may be slower than anticipated, but the mere discussions serve as psychological warfare.
Time.news Editor: With the potential delivery of Oreshnik systems expected in the second half of 2025, what should NATO and Western allies consider in response?
Dr. Ivan Petrov: NATO should closely monitor the developments in Belarus and the wider region. Strengthening deterrence measures and enhancing military presence in Eastern Europe could be prudent. Additionally, diplomatic efforts must continue in parallel to address overall security concerns without escalating tensions unnecessarily.
time.news Editor: what practical advice can you offer to policymakers and military strategists in the West as they navigate this complex situation?
Dr. Ivan Petrov: Policymakers should embrace a nuanced approach—balancing military readiness with diplomatic engagement. Building multilateral coalitions to respond to potential threats from Belarus, while fostering dialogue to reduce tensions, could lead to a more stable security surroundings. Understanding the local context and motivations in Belarus is key to formulating effective strategies.
Time.news Editor: Thank you, Dr. Petrov, for your insights into the Oreshnik system and its broader implications. Your expertise sheds light on a very urgent topic for global security.
Dr. Ivan Petrov: It was my pleasure. Thank you for having me.