Lukashenko claims he and Putin joke about who's the 'bigger dictator'

At a youth forum in Minsk on September 17, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko made a casual remark that revealed something about the texture of his relationship with Vladimir Putin. He told the assembled young leaders that he and the Russian president regularly joke with each other about which one of them deserves the title of Europe's ultimate dictator. "They say I'm the last dictator in Europe," Lukashenko said, according to reporting from Novaya Gazeta. "Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and I often argue, jokingly, about which of us is the bigger dictator."

The comment, delivered with apparent ease to an audience of youth leaders, underscores a partnership that has become central to Russia's military operations in Ukraine. Lukashenko, 72, has ruled Belarus without interruption since 1994—longer than any other sitting head of state in Europe. Putin has held power in Russia since 2000, with a formal presidency beginning in 2012 after serving as prime minister. The two men have cultivated a relationship that Western officials view with deep concern, particularly as Belarus has become indispensable to Moscow's war effort.

While Belarus has not deployed ground troops to fight in Ukraine, the country functions as a critical staging ground for Russian military operations. According to reporting from the Kyiv Post, Russia depends on Belarus for weapons components and uses Belarusian territory to launch military strikes across the border. In August, Ukrainian media outlet Ukrainska Pravda reported that Belarus was constructing a new railway capable of handling military trains in Gomel Oblast, positioned directly adjacent to the Ukrainian border. The infrastructure investment signals long-term commitment to supporting Russian operations.

The closeness of the two leaders is evident in their frequent contact and coordinated messaging. After meeting in Moscow on August 27, Lukashenko publicly congratulated Putin on September 21 following Russian election results. He praised what he called an "unprecedented turnout" and framed the outcome as a rebuke to what he described as external attempts to undermine the process. The timing and tone of his statement reflected alignment on how both leaders present their legitimacy to their respective publics.

When addressing the youth forum on the question of political succession in Belarus, Lukashenko offered a different kind of message. He insisted that no one currently possesses the capacity to assume power and govern effectively. "Never believe those who say that Lukashenko is clinging to power with blue-knuckled hands," he told the audience. He framed his continued rule not as personal ambition but as a practical necessity, suggesting that the country lacks a successor capable of maintaining stability. "The only question is whether you are capable today of taking over the country and holding on to it," he said. "If you are, start tomorrow. To be frank, I cannot yet answer that question positively."

Lukashenko also offered a historical justification for his authoritarian grip. "I became a dictator then because I stood up against the entire 'civilized world,'" he claimed, positioning his rule as a form of resistance to Western pressure. That pressure remains substantial. Lithuania's Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys recently stated that his country sees no reason to soften its stance toward Belarus, saying the regime has not changed its behavior and that continued economic pressure remains the appropriate response.

Yet cracks in the Western consensus on Belarus sanctions have begun to appear. In September, Lukashenko announced that Belarus had begun selling potash—a key fertilizer ingredient and a primary export—to the United States. The sales became possible after the U.S. lifted sanctions on Belarusian potash following the release of political prisoners. The European Union, however, maintains its own sanctions regime against Belarus, creating a split in Western pressure. The divergence suggests that economic leverage, while still substantial, may be fragmenting as different nations weigh strategic interests differently.