>

For whatever motives he has, it’s very clear that he has employed as much passive resistance as possible for engaging Belarus in the invasion of Ukraine.   
Neither he nor Belarus have any capacity for active resistance, so this passive resistance is meaningful.
Aren’t we a little bit past that point now? >

IF a request like this was signed it would likely be for 1 of 2 reasons
1: Stop Russia from being strengthed during the coming rumored offensive
2: Give Belarus a final chance to reintegrate into the larger European sphere, as assisting Russia with its troops in Ukraine would be the final death knell. Belarus as a country would simply cease to exist as far as the European Markets and Governments would see it.
Edit: I do am have stupid. Knell* >

3) sign it, then claim Ukraine broke it thus giving them an excuse to join the Russian effort further.
This agreement isn't worth anything with Lukashenko and Putin still in play. >

4) He knows the Belarusian military would immediately enact a coup and remove him so signing it is a way to pretend he has power. >

I hear there.  The vast majority of their pop is against attacking Ukraine >

One of those most fascinating polling points of the Ukrainian conflict is that fact that upwards of 80% of Russians fully support the conflict whereas upwards of 80-90% of Belarusians oppose the conflict. 
We tend to lump them together but Belarus and Russia are two fundamentally different countries. >

Spent last few months in Belarus.
Reddit has no idea how anti Luka and Russia they are. >

Interesting. Did you see a lot of people under the age of 40 there? Really curious how many have fled versus stayed. >

Most people haven't fled. I spent some time in Minsk, Gomel and a few other places.
It's very 50/50 in terms of age, just like any country.
They are also terrified of uttering a word about anything in public, but the minute you sre behind closed doors, they are clearly anti Russia, anti Putin, anti Luka etc 
Right behind the FSB building in Minsk is prison with the 2020 protestors still inside (apparently).
Also, Belarus citizens are very critical of Belarusians who ingest Russian news.
Edit: to be clear, during the 2020 protests, we saw it was police / army vs the people. But for some reason, Belarusians have a belief that if they are forced into a war, the army will turn on Luka almost instantly. >

Interesting. I have that same belief as well >

I'm Belarusian.
Stop listening to this guy, he is a pathological liar. >

It would be so interesting if Belarus were to declare war on Ukraine and immediately after doing so, someone assassinated Lukashenko and said:
"Stop listening to this guy, he is a pathological liar".
And we all just shrugged our shoulders, nodded in agreement and didn't go to war. >

Lukashenka is very stupid but he is also a survivor.  He isn’t going to follow Putin off the cliff by declaring war on Ukraine.  He would if Russia were winning but since they are not he is all talk and no action. >

He definitely acts stupid, but I don’t think he is actually stupid. He has somehow successfully stayed in power for a very long time with a powerful neighbor that routinely invades and usurps their neighbors while his population is not only against him and his government, but has revolted and now routinely sabotages their own infrastructure even knowing the penalty is death.  All this and he is somehow navigating the tightrope between complete oblivion and full war with Ukraine. 
I don’t think he survives this, but I think his chances are actually a bit better than Putin. >

He is definetly acting. Otherwise he would have been replaced by putin by now. His saving feature is being an incompetent yet loyal fool. Which makes him irreplacable >

Lukashenko knows Russia will lose, he doesn’t want to go to war with Ukraine but he’s beholden to Putin.  Notice that everything he does around Belarus / Ukraine war kicks the can down the road - “yes, but now is not the time”. >

I agree with this analysis. As long as Russia keeps losing Lukachenko will do his best to be as little involved as he can get away with. He is a scumbag who only cares about himself. >

He knows there is a rope in The Hague with his name on it >

More like a brand new skyscraper in Belarus to get pushed out of. >

Generous to call them skyscrapers haha >

All the washer and dryers the Russians stole from Ukraine gotta fund something right? >

There aren't ant Belarusians stealing washer dryers in Ukraine so not sure I get the joke >

I'm saying Putin would build one to show his success in Ukraine with a skyscraper and then promptly push homeboy out of it. >

He looks like a cartoon villain out of The Adventures of Tintin. >

I can't unsee it now haha >

Which one? >

I'm sure it'll be as tight as the German-Soviet pact from '39. >

Was about to say I know a Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, when I see it. >

Funny thing but history shows that non-aggression pacts usually guarentee aggression. >

Well you don't sign a non aggression pact with your allies. >

Would he be willing to let nato station troops in Belarus to make sure he isn’t violating the pact by letting Russian troops attack Ukraine from his territory? 🤔 >

I didn't read the article, but the title said he'd been "asked" didn't say anything about him being receptive to it. >

He doesn’t even say who has asked him and the writer doesn’t seem to have received confirmation from Ukraine officials so at this point it’s not even clear if anyone asked him or he just made that up. >

An obvious ploy by Belarus dictator Lukashenko. If Ukraine agreed to such a thing (Zelensky isn't stupid!) the next step would be for Lukashenko to claim that Ukraine "violated" the pact so as to provide a rationale for joining Putin's criminal aggression against Ukraine.
It's worth noting that Lukashenko doesn't say who asked him to seal a non-aggression pact with Ukraine - probably Putin. >

They never needed anything to justify aggression in the first place.
On the other hand, Luka probably feels the need to make sure those Leo2s won't inadvertently end up rolling through the streets of Minsk. >

This would be more about garnering more public support for aggression, which is fairly low in Belarus where their people  (correctly) see Lukashenko as a Russian puppet who stole the election. >

lol just like Hitler and Stalin Non Aggression pact.
history doesn't always repeat but it does rhyme. >

If he did it would not take very long for him to "fall" from Putin's favor. >

Breaking News!
30 seconds after announcing potential non-aggression pact with Ukraine, the Belarus leader fell down an elevator shaft and died.
Investigators say it's the first reported case of elevator death with no elevator involved. >

Like the one that Russia signed with Ukraine when it gave up its nukes?
They should print the agreement on rolls of toilet paper because that's what an agreement with a Russian puppet would be worth. >

Like the one Germany and Russia signed in WWII.  Hey wait, I’ve seen this one…. >

It's almost like fascist dictators don't honour their treaty obligations. >

"Our troops are merely passing by." >

I read the article and noticed a decided lack of Ukrainian corroboration. My guess? This is so later Belarus can accuse NATO and the West forcing Ukraine to fight even though they just want peace. 
“The Ukrainians wanted to sign an nonaggression pact but NATO wouldn’t let them, we need to save them from NATO so that’s why we burned down that hospital.” >

belarus 3 years ago was pro-maidan and anti-putin; today he is putin's closest international partner.  the protests changed everything.  luka has learned that he is not immune from being color-revolutioned, no matter how strategic he is as a partner against putin >

Belarusian here. Reuters' editors are either oblivious to whom they're quoting, or are paid off by the regime to quote BELTA of all things. This is like quoting satan saying that he's actually a pretty good guy, source: trust me bro.
Ignore this article and everything the clown says, or better yet, inverse it to be closer to the truth. >

Didn’t Hitler sign a nonaggression pact with Russia before attacking? >

I prefer to call it a ‘Please don’t bomb fellas I’m just a wee little lad with a big angry daddy who I can’t admit I’m afraid of’ pact >

Why does this feel like pre-invasion statement inferring “we are in it for peace, but just because Russia is sending troops in Ukraine from our sovereign soil doesn’t really mean we are on their side” but we are or maybe not 🤷‍♂️ >

'"I don't know why the Ukrainians need this," Lukashenko was quoted as saying. He said his security forces would respond harshly to any threat to internal order and did not want a repeat of mass protests against him in 2020/21 which he cast at the time as part of an alleged Western regime change plot.'  
Yeah, it can't be he's unpopular, it has to be a "Western regime change plot." These losers are all the same. >

So, I assume that means they will be kicking out the Russians who are using Belarus to attack Ukraine? >

I'm sure Russia's puppet will adhere to it just as rigorously as they did the Budapest Memorandum and Minsk Agreement. >

TIL non-aggression is letting another county use your airbases as staging grounds to launch an invasion on your neighbor’s capital. >

Did you read the article? Or title even?
He is being asked to sign one ,he's not proposing one >

It's too late, he already allows safe harbor to Russian soldiers and allows Russia to use his country as a staging area. >

It is not like he had any choice. He walked into this mess back when he beat down the opposition plus forced down the airplane to arrest a dissident and therefore lost all friends except Putin. Now he is paying the price for past bad choices. It is not like he can oppose Putin without getting invaded and killed.
He is a terrible person and created this mess himself so I feel zero sympathy for him but I have so far seen no evidence that he supports the invasion of Ukraine. Invading Ukraine is very unpopular in Belarus and he has nothing to gain from it personally either.