Topic: 2026 – Implementation of Sanctions
Country: Belarus
Delegate Name: Charlisa Penzak
Special Committee on the United Nations Charter
Implementation of Sanctions
Republic of Belarus
Charlisa Penzak
Groves High School
Currently, the United Nations Security Council enforces fifteen active sanctions regimes for a variety of purposes spanning counter-terrorism and nuclear non-proliferation. Although Belarus does not face sanctions from the UNSC, it is the target of various unilateral sanctions imposed by the European Union, the United States, and several partner states. The UN General Assembly stated, in Resolution 78/135 of December 2023, that unilateral coercive trade measures like sanctions are contrary to the principles of international law, adversely affecting economic development and international cooperation. This logic also extends to the multilateral sanction imposed by the UNSC.
The Republic of Belarus strongly disagrees with the use of sanctions. In fact, Belarussian President Aleksandr Lukashenko explained that “it is in our common interest to speak even louder about this problem and jointly seek the abolition of restrictions on trade, especially on vital commodities.” Economic sanctions are almost the only tool in the West’s foreign policy toolkit, one that leverages their economic leverage and exploits the inequality of the international trade system to coerce smaller countries to their will. As the Belarussian representative to the UN Pavel Evseenko explained, “the goal of sanctions has been stated loud and clear – to achieve a change of power through food riots.”
However, not only are sanctions inconsistent with UN values of equality and economic development, but they are rarely effective. Past sanctions have pushed Belarus and Russia to a path of self-sustainability and regional integration. Instead of encouraging broad economic cooperation, these sanctions marginalize certain nations and draw the targeted “enemy” countries closer together. Sanctions violate sovereignty and often harm innocent civilians the most, who struggle with the economic consequences. For example, sanctions on Belarusian potash fertilizers and agricultural products have contributed to disruptions in global food supply chains, increasing production costs and food prices and hurting the poorest in developing countries. Ironically, these measures recognize the quality of Belarussian goods and instead of fair competition, these nations chose to resort to protective policies. Moreover, sanctions can have adverse consequences for the actor as well. EU energy sanctions on Russia led to significant increases in energy prices in Europe, harming ordinary European citizens. Belarus argues that sanctions produce unintended global consequences that disproportionately affect vulnerable populations.
Instead, political disputes should be resolved through dialogue. Belarus believes that sanctions should be used only in exceptional circumstances and remain strictly limited to prevent unnecessary harm to civilian populations and national economies. Sanctions should not serve as instruments of geopolitical pressure, as such practices perpetuate inequalities embedded in international law and escalate tensions. Instead, Belarus supports strengthening multilateral diplomacy and cooperation within institutions like the United Nations to promote stability and the peaceful resolution of conflicts.
Works Cited:
https://main.un.org/securitycouncil/en/sanctions/information
https://www.mfa.gov.by/en/press/news_mfa/c56c5277570a777c.html
https://www.belarus.by/en/press-center/speeches-and-interviews/lukashenko-calls-to-put-up-joint-front-against-western-sanctions_i_162107.html
https://www.mfa.gov.by/en/press/statements/d3e236137ef40de9.html
