Capital Flight
- Pavel Latushka
- Mar 16
- 4 min read
Lukashenko's propaganda constantly speaks of stability. Regime media report that the economy is holding up, that the banking system is strong, that reserves exist. The dictator's representatives declare from high platforms: we will support exporters, we will finance promising projects, we are entering new markets. But where does the money actually go? And why is capital leaving Belarus instead of flowing in? That is precisely what is happening today.
Any normal economy operates on a straightforward principle. A country creates conditions for investment. Investors arrive. Jobs are created. Industry develops. People's incomes grow. But Belarus operates on the opposite model.
Today, the Lukashenko regime is exporting capital from the country, investing it abroad, while simultaneously telling Belarusians that there is no money for domestic development. Consider the real examples.
Lukashenko announces projects in Oman — worth hundreds of millions of dollars. He personally thanks the Omani authorities for a plot of land in an exotic oasis with a comfortable climate. And a question arises: why is Belarusian money being invested in tourist facilities in the Middle East? Why is that money not going into Belarus's regions? Why is it not going into modernizing enterprises? Why is it not going into creating new industries? But this is only a small part of it.
Lukashenko speaks of establishing fertilizer production in Oman. He speaks of projects in Algeria. He speaks of building a seaport in southeastern Africa together with Zimbabwe and Mozambique. In addition, he plans to build a port terminal in the Murmansk region and offers to participate in modernizing a port on Sakhalin.
And again the question arises. Why is Belarusian money being invested in other countries' ports? Yes, Belarus has no ports of its own. But instead of creating logistics centers, industrial clusters, and infrastructure within the country, the regime is trying to build infrastructure in Russia and Africa. This is not investment policy. This is capital flight.
Another telling example. Recently, licensed assembly of motorcycles under the "Minsk" brand was launched in the Smolensk region of Russia. A Belarusian brand. Belarusian history. Belarusian industrial tradition. But production is being launched in Russia. Why? Because investors are not prepared to work in Belarus. Because business has no faith in the stability of the rules. Because the regime has destroyed trust.
The head of the National Bank, Roman Golovchenko, recently stated plainly: "Nobody is prepared to buy finished products — everyone wants a certain degree of localisation." That is, partners demand that production be relocated to their territory. But the most striking thing is something else. Golovchenko says: "Belarus's financial system is doing reasonably well… the banking system has sufficient assets… we are ready to provide financial support to exporters."
What does this mean in practice? State banks will extend credit to projects abroad and to Belarusian enterprises to support exports. In other words, Belarusian taxpayers' money is going not toward modernizing the domestic economy, but toward financing external projects.
Meanwhile, warehouse inventories are growing. Their level has reached 80% of average monthly output (a year ago it did not exceed 60%). At the same time, domestic industry is declining. In 2025, industrial output fell by 1.8% year-on-year. In January 2026, industrial production contracted by a further 3.4%, and freight turnover fell by 0.5%.
The facts are stark. MAZ truck production before Lukashenko came to power stood at around 50,000 vehicles per year. Today it is around 7,000. By comparison, Poland alone produces around 70,000 MAN trucks per year from a single company — ten times more than the entire Belarusian industry. Thanks to Lukashenko, we have lost markets, brands, and technological development.
At the same time, opaque financial schemes flourish inside Belarus. The government recently decided to extend loans to the Belarusian National Biotechnology Corporation — but the official documents classify the amounts allocated and the purposes for which the funds are to be used. The state issues loans, but citizens are not told how much money or for what.
Another important point — integration with Russia. For years we were told that the EAEU represented enormous opportunities. That a single economic space would open up markets. That Belarusian industry would gain advantages. But what is happening now? Russia plans to introduce permanent customs controls on its border with Belarus and Kazakhstan — effectively restoring internal customs barriers, with requirements stricter than those applied to goods from third countries. This means only one thing: even within allied integration projects, Belarus gains no advantage.
And yet Lukashenko himself acknowledges: "We are weighed down by the loans we have taken. We need to sort this out." So state debt is growing. The economy is stagnating. In January 2026, GDP contracted by 1.2%. But instead of creating conditions for investment, the regime is exporting capital abroad.
The reason is very simple. Investors do not go where there are no independent courts, no protection of property, no transparent rules. Belarus today is a country with thousands of political prisoners and repression of business. No investor will put money into such a system.
An economy is, above all, a matter of trust — the trust of investors, of business, of citizens. But the Lukashenko regime has destroyed that trust. And now Belarus is losing investments, technology, markets, and people.
Today Belarus faces a simple choice. Either we continue living in a system where taxpayers' money is exported abroad — including for the personal projects and personal accounts of the dictator's circle — while industry degrades and the economy depends on the political decisions of one man. Or we build a country where investment flows into Belarus, enterprises are modernised, and the economy becomes modern and competitive.
Belarus deserves an economy of growth, not an economy of survival. That requires economic freedom. And above all — political change.
Comments