How We Tried to Implement Projects in Our Homeland Under the Current Realities of Belarus

Translation of the proposal to the Ministry of Economy. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/mineconomy.pdf

Transforming Colour: How Domestic Intellectual Capital Opens a New Path for Industrial Cooperation

Amid the large-scale transformation of global trade, the Republic of Belarus is forming a new model of long-term economic resilience. The current objectives of the country's economic sector are aimed at creating flexible export-oriented industries capable of generating high added value and securing foreign currency inflows through diversified sales channels. Within the Programme of Socio-Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2026–2030, special attention is given to knowledge-intensive industries and the fine chemical industry, which can effectively replace imported analogues and enter new foreign markets — above all, the markets of Asia, the Middle East, and BRICS.

A serious investor is not interested in empty plots of land or preferential premises as such. The investor needs ready-made projects with confirmed export potential and working international business models capable of building alternative transit and financial routes under conditions of global fragmentation.

Finding such solutions requires a fundamentally different synergy between state resources and private high-tech business. The case of the professional cosmetics brand StasyAlex, created on the basis of LLC "Cosmetic Technologies" in Novopolotsk, clearly demonstrates how domestic developments in colour science and IT technologies — EdTech — can address this fundamental task and return Belarus to the status of a global production hub. In any other jurisdiction, a startup with such fundamentals would become the object of intense competition among venture funds and specialized institutional investors.

The Phenomenon of Organic Growth: First-Year Efficiency and Entry into the International Market

Most classical cosmetics projects on the global market require multi-million-dollar investments, of which up to 70% is irreversibly burned in media advertising costs. The Belarusian project followed a fundamentally different and economically efficient path. At the initial stage, with starting working capital of only 60,000 dollars — which was fully returned — the team focused on a deep understanding of market demand, innovation, and impeccable product quality, and built a working international e-commerce system.

The main indicator of the model's viability was the first year of operations. It was during the first twelve months of active work on the global market that the brand made a powerful leap, generating explosive sales and producing the main volume of its foreign currency revenue. This allowed the project not only to repay the initial investment almost immediately, but also to begin stable dividend payments to the co-founders shortly afterwards.

The uniqueness of this result lies in the complete reliance on the organic trust of the professional community. Sales were launched without marketing budgets — after a quiet announcement on Instagram. Explosive, avalanche-like demand formed naturally: receiving products marked "Made in Belarus", professional makeup artists and retail customers massively shared sincere emotions, filmed video reviews, and incorporated the cosmetics into their daily work. Each loyal customer brought dozens of new consumers.

The product received an exceptionally warm response from the beauty community worldwide. Even under geopolitical pressure, no claim arose from international regulatory bodies regarding the quality, formulation, or safety of Belarusian cosmetics. However, restrictions on the import of European chemical raw materials and equipment, sanctions against Belarusian banks, and closed borders require the business to be scaled — a business that already has growing deferred demand — and transferred onto the rails of interstate cooperation.

Scientific Foundation and Ecosystem Synergy: The Catalogue and the Book as an Intellectual Foundation

The main reason this project is of exceptional interest to international capital is the presence of a powerful scientific and methodological foundation created in Belarus. Unlike standard cosmetics production, the StasyAlex brand sells not merely a physical product, but a complete intellectual ecosystem.

The foundation of this ecosystem is the scientific and practical work "Metamorphoses of Colour". This is a full academic study in the physics of colour, light, anatomical logic, and natural colour harmony. The book has been translated into the key languages of the world and serves as a basic textbook for an international online makeup school — EdTech. The project trains specialists for the global market according to its own logically grounded and practically applicable standards of colour science.

The direct material embodiment of this scientific theory is the new collection recorded in the official AMORAVES catalogue. This is not merely a product line, but a unique conceptual ecosystem of professional cosmetics built on the laws of natural colour harmony. The design and palettes of the complex multi-colour AVIAN palettes fully reproduce the ideal colour harmonies of living nature and birds. Every product in the AMORAVES catalogue has high collectible value for the professional community. The synergy of the book, online education, and a finished physical product creates a unique algorithm: international specialists are trained through Belarusian books and methods, which automatically generates conscious, long-term, and avalanche-like demand for the specific cosmetics presented in the catalogue.

The presence of such a closed, self-reproducing sales system is the main argument for investing capital.

The Hybrid PRC–Belarus Model: A Real Solution for Global Export

The officially announced Years of Industrial Cooperation between Belarus and China open the possibility for the government's economic sector to implement a flagship pilot project involving 5 million dollars of foreign direct investment. The new model solves the main task: it gives a large Chinese investor a legal and protected route to premium markets with maximum added value — the countries of the Middle East, such as the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, China, the BRICS and SCO countries, and also — because cosmetics are absent from all sanctions packages — the EU and US markets.

In effect, Belarus returns to its original concept of "Great Stone" as a jurisdictional bridge for Asian capital into global markets, but in a new hybrid format — not through sanctioned goods, but through high-margin products that do not fall under restrictive regimes.

The logic of the project is built on a clear separation of production stages.

A specialized strategic investor from China — Guangdong province — enters the joint venture with its technological capacities. At the partner factory in China, using local high-purity raw materials and under the guidance of the Belarusian team, unique branded packaging is produced for the AMORAVES collection, and base cosmetic masses are synthesized according to the technological documents and formulations. The semi-finished products are initially provided with international safety passports — MSDS — of the Chinese standard, which fully removes compliance risks during further certification.

Then the raw semi-finished product arrives at a new resident enterprise of the "Great Stone" Industrial Park at a zero duty and VAT rate. Within the allocated budget, inside a rented standard module, a ready-to-assemble engineering structure of clean rooms — HPL panels and supply ventilation with HEPA filters — is installed within three weeks to meet the international cosmetic GMP standard. Within this contour, under the author's supervision of the domestic developers, the key stage takes place: the introduction of exclusive pigments, final blending of complex textures, laboratory control, and filling. The product enters the market under the official and reputationally strong marking "StasyAlex Made in Belarus", preserving its historical identity.

Finished products are shipped in large batches from Belarus to regional warehouses of decentralized fulfilment in Poland, the United States, and the UAE. Dubai serves not merely as a warehouse, but as a key geopolitical hub for the markets of the Gulf Cooperation Council — a vector that corresponds to the official export diversification priorities set out in Resolution of the Council of Ministers No. 813.

Financial Contour: Decentralization and Fulfilment of Currency KPIs

The proposed architecture protects operational activities from cross-border banking blockages and simultaneously guarantees full fulfilment of the currency plans of the Ministry of Economy and the National Bank of the Republic of Belarus.

At the stage of customs clearance in the EU and the United States, the seller is the parent international holding — Hong Kong or Dubai — while the country of origin remains Belarus. Retail customers purchase the product through local websites, and funds are accumulated via Stripe or PayPal gateways in the holding's foreign accounts.

It is important to understand the nature of this structure: the presence of a parent holding in the UAE or Hong Kong is not an instrument of tax optimization, but the only possible compliance shield for the Chinese investor. The Chinese manufacturing partner physically cannot enter the Belarusian jurisdiction and sell directly through Stripe or PayPal to the United States and the EU without the risk of secondary sanctions. The holding acts as a sanctions buffer that allows Asian capital to trade safely with premium Western and Middle Eastern consumers without risking its mainland assets.

The holding officially transfers currency — in yuan or dollars — to the Belarusian resident in "Great Stone" as payment for contract assembly services — tolling — and to the base company as licensing royalties for the EdTech platform and books. For the controlling bodies of the Republic, this is a clean and transparent export of high-tech production and intellectual services, fully satisfying the requirements of Decree No. 178 and the priorities of the 2026–2030 Programme regarding digital transformation and IT services exports.

Thus, the project creates a protected monetization channel in markets with maximum margins, using the Belarusian jurisdiction as a security guarantor for the Asian investor. For the National Bank and the Ministry of Economy, this means an inflow of hard currency into the country — outwardly presented through the Eastern vector, namely the Chinese joint venture and the UAE hub, but actually extracted from premium Western and Middle Eastern markets.

Anatomy of the Figures: The Scale of the Debut Batch

The project's performance indicators are confirmed by a precise calculation of the first industrial batch from the updated AMORAVES collection, amounting to 405,500 units.

If the same volume were produced at the former base in Novopolotsk, total costs under sanctions conditions would amount to approximately 2,200,000 dollars, assuming access to investment and technological equipment — an access that is absent because of sanctions. The new hybrid model significantly optimizes component procurement costs in China. The profitability potential calculation is based on minimum wholesale prices, which include the maximum discount for promotions and distribution: the average wholesale price per unit is 19.44 dollars; the total base revenue of the holding reaches 7,882,500 dollars; and the total cost of the batch within the PRC–Belarus contour is 2,142,278 dollars. After deducting estimated acquiring costs and taxes, the net profit from one cycle is 4,871,038 dollars.

When the new marketing strategy is included — targeted EdTech seeding, under which 2% of the produced volume will be sent free of charge to the international network of online school graduates, including opinion leaders with their own salons from Warsaw to Dubai — the full sale of the starting batch is expected to take only 6–12 months. Moving to direct retail e-commerce prices — which are on average 40% higher than the calculated wholesale prices — would increase the debut batch revenue to 11 million dollars, ensuring payback of the investor's full 5 million dollars already in the first year.

At the same time, the existing LLC "Cosmetic Technologies" in Novopolotsk bears no infrastructure costs: it is freed from production load, purchases the finished wholesale volume from "Great Stone", and systematically scales sales in the EAEU market — Belarus, Russia, and Kazakhstan.

Final Summary

The project to scale the StasyAlex brand is a ready-made and economically justified instrument for qualitatively changing the investment agenda of the Ministry of Economy and the National Agency for Investment and Privatization. Instead of trying to attract investors "to nowhere", the agencies receive a packaged project that solves the main task of Asian capital — access to premium global markets through a safe jurisdiction.

The state is not required to allocate budget subsidies or attract loans. The project is fully financed by private capital from China. The role of the National Agency for Investment and Privatization and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs here is a partnership role — to consider the possibility of including the StasyAlex investment passport in the pool of priority PRC–Belarus industrial cooperation cases and of using this project, including in closed mode, by the diplomatic and trade missions of Belarus in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou as proof that the Belarusian platform remains a working instrument for Asian business even under current conditions.

For the ministries, this is a model case of attracting foreign direct investment that is protected from external risks and demonstrates:

• fulfilment of country diversification indicators through the UAE and PRC hubs;
• an inflow of hard currency into the country through the export of high-tech services and intellectual property;
• monetization of national intellectual products in premium markets;
• strengthening the prestige of domestic production under the "Made in Belarus" mark.

P.S. No sanctions package contains cosmetics. This project could become the first to produce innovative premium products with high added value for the global market and to be officially and legally supplied to the European Union and the United States with the proud marking "Made in Belarus". The possibilities for global market scaling are unlimited.

The volume of more than 400,000 units is caused by the first 135 SKUs from the more than 1,000 developed, and only because we are starting small, not being certain that we can attract investment under Belarusian conditions. Without state participation — no matter how excellent an export project may be created and tested as an MVP — it will run into the exceptional regulatory framework of the EAEU and the unwillingness of investors to deal with Belarusian residents. Attracting 5 million dollars of investment for a Belarusian startup is already an achievement.

Please consider the possibility of implementing this project in accordance with the existing regulatory framework of the Republic of Belarus and the EAEU, and in the context of the Programme of Socio-Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2026–2030, especially Chapter 2.

Programme of Socio-Economic Development for 2026–2030

If necessary, I am ready to provide all additional documents: the draft business plan, the project structure, and all necessary explanations.

History of the project

Translation of the response of the Ministry of Economy. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/21317799.pdf

Translation of the proposal sent to the Administration of the President. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/AP-Food03072600000117.pdf

Proposal on the creation of a pilot R&D centre of advanced development for export diversification, harmonization with global standards, and creation of high-value-added food industry products

A group of initiative-driven developers from Belarus has developed nine categories of innovative food products, primarily functional products, for the needs of the premium markets of the EU, the United States, the Middle East, and Asia. The full list is available at food.stasyalex.com/blog.

To realize the export potential, all development is carried out according to the regulatory base and requirements of EFSA, FDA, and other regulators, excluding the EAEU. Interest in the developments has been shown by both Western companies and investors, as well as Chinese companies. For more than one year, there have been proposals to relocate the project from the EAEU to another jurisdiction. We are still holding on and trying to find ways to develop Belarus's export potential, doing our best to persuade investors not to write Belarus off.

Investors have proposed refining and prototyping our developments in Belarusian laboratories on a paid basis for further scaling at Western enterprises and studying markets through MVPs. Since Belarus has no private R&D centres, we applied to the State Committee on Science and Technology and to the Scientific and Practical Centre of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus for Food with a request to provide, on a paid basis, the services of the NPC pilot production facility in Maryina Gorka. Unfortunately, neither laboratory research nor pilot production services could be obtained.

The Scientific and Practical Centre for Food explained that it does not provide such services, works exclusively "for the production line", and operates exclusively within the regulatory framework of the EAEU — that is, for the internal market.

To the question whether we could build a separate R&D laboratory and pilot production facility in Belarus using foreign investors' funds, oriented toward developing high-margin advanced food products according to global standards, the Scientific and Practical Centre for Food explained that no one in Belarus would allow this. It does not matter that you want to develop and produce products only for export; you will still be obliged to work exclusively according to EAEU regulations and norms, and only according to them. Therefore, even the option of an innovation sandbox initiated by private actors is categorically impossible.

We accept the situation with understanding, although it is difficult. There are established rules — the EAEU — and no official will take responsibility for proposing an exception, however noble the goal may be: innovation and export.

Meanwhile, for many years we have been working to ensure that Belarus participates in exports to the global market, creates innovative and advanced products, and becomes recognizable and respected. Previously, we were already forced to hand over the results of our previous export cosmetics startup to Chinese companies: innovative developments, technologies, and the market. The story is available at stasyalex.com/history.

But that was cosmetics. Now we are talking about food, about functional food products in Belarus, where there is a huge and excellent raw material base and enormous potential for exporting high-margin products with high added value. Perhaps, at the present moment, any initiative to study international standards deeply and gradually harmonize with them may seem meaningless: sanctions, protective duties, logistics. But strategically, if one looks at the map and at the efforts undertaken by the President to normalize relations with neighbours, it becomes clear that isolation will not last forever and that one must prepare for this already now, independently seeking ways to enter external markets.

The Head of State has for many years demanded that the government diversify markets, master and produce high-margin products, and increase exports. The main risks for the country are well described in the Programme of Socio-Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2026–2030, particularly in Chapter 2, and have been repeatedly voiced by the President. However, self-isolation within the EAEU regulatory framework does nothing to overcome the problems stated in Chapter 2 of the Programme and does not contribute to fulfilling the President's requirements.

Unfortunately, Belarus does not have a single innovative food R&D centre. Around the world this is absolutely normal practice: food corporations collect and test interesting ideas and innovations. Nestlé and Danone follow this practice, aggregating the initiatives of small startups and private developers through their own R&D networks, studying and shaping global trends. PepsiCo Labs and Coca-Cola are engaged in similar activities, as are hundreds of advanced private R&D centres. Examples include Mattson in the United States, NIZO in the Netherlands, and Food Research Lab in India.

There are many such centres in China. Work on functional food and beverage innovation has also been underway for many years in Russia. Without breakthrough innovations, Belarus already finds it difficult to compete with food producers from China and Russia, even in the internal Belarusian market.

I propose considering the creation of a state research R&D centre for food, whose activities would be placed outside the EAEU regulatory framework. A pilot project. Such an R&D model would allow the development of high-margin food products based on Belarusian raw materials for specific external markets. Such a project could be interesting to serious Chinese investors, because it has global export potential and could, in the future, help solve the tasks of market diversification, export growth, and increased added value.

As an example of what we planned to implement together with foreign investors, we present the FITWIT R&D project. We understand that a private initiative cannot initiate a refusal to comply with regulator requirements to live according to EAEU regulations. But the creation of a similar R&D laboratory by the state itself, with the right to work according to international standards, would make it possible to return such advanced private investment, keep our talent inside the country, and create a legal, high-margin export gateway for transferring technologies and, in the future, food products to premium markets around the world — and to begin work on harmonizing and synchronizing our food industry with global markets.

Attachments for review:

• three files describing the R&D centre;
• one product MMR, to understand the regulatory field in which our developments are being conducted.

Translation of the response of the National Academy of Sciences. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/nan-food.pdf

In its response, the National Academy of Sciences once again confirms that there can be no innovations or export exceptions in Belarus: the entire regulatory framework is created exclusively for the internal EAEU market.

Translation of the appeal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/in_mid.pdf

Proposal — individual appeal No. 03072600000141

My appeal No. 03072600000117 dated 30 June 2026 to the Administration of the President, forwarded to the apparatus of the Council of Ministers and then to the National Academy of Sciences, contained a proposal on creating an R&D centre of advanced development for export diversification, harmonization with global standards, and creation of high-value-added food industry products. A response was received, and it causes some bewilderment.

I ask the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to carefully analyze both the appeal and the response to it, because this directly concerns the functions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and coordination of foreign economic activity.

In my appeal No. 03072600000117 dated 30 June 2026, I deliberately take the EAEU market out of the equation and focus attention on exports, external markets, including the markets of the "far arc". I pay special attention to Chapter 2 of the Programme of Socio-Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2026–2030 and to the Head of State's requirements concerning market diversification, innovation, added value, and foreign direct investment.

The response of the National Academy of Sciences states: "In accordance with the international obligations of the Republic of Belarus within the Eurasian Economic Union, the development, production, and circulation of food products in the territory of the Republic are strictly regulated by the requirements of the Technical Regulations of the Customs Union, in particular TR CU 021/2011 'On Food Safety'," and "The creation of separate regulatory production facilities completely excluded from the unified EAEU regulatory framework is not provided for by current legislation."

The response of the National Academy of Sciences produces a depressing picture: while the President is making maximum efforts to diversify exports, develop efficient high-value-added production, and attract foreign direct investment into the country, technically, through the regulatory framework, the country's economy turns out to be locked inside the EAEU. The regulations and certification model are recognized nowhere except the EAEU itself, and export supplies outside the EAEU will remain exclusively raw-material-based.

Because there is no harmonization or synchronization of certification models with external markets, and not even an operational understanding of rapidly changing global regulatory requirements, supplies of non-resource food products to external markets will be symbolic and will impose large certification and approval costs on producers.

Relying on the Regulation on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the supervisory functions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs — paragraphs 7 and 11 of Resolution of the Council of Ministers No. 813 — we ask you, as experienced diplomats and strategists of foreign economic activity, to help clarify the following questions:

1. How do EAEU partners — Kazakhstan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, and the Russian Federation — ensure certification of food products for export to the markets of the EU, the United States, and China? Do they obtain additional national certificates outside the EAEU technical regulations, or do they use other mechanisms?
2. How does the Ministry of Foreign Affairs plan to fulfil the President's requirements and Resolution of the Council of Ministers No. 813 on export diversification if advanced science claims a monopoly on R&D but officially acknowledges that it cannot work according to international standards? And if science can, where are the non-resource economic achievements in exports and added value, the absence of which is stated in Chapter 2 of the 2026–2030 Programme?
3. What mechanisms provided by the EAEU Treaty — in particular Articles 51 and 52 and Annex No. 9 — and by national legislation — paragraph 5 of Article 19 of the Law on Technical Regulation and Standardization No. 262-Z — can be used to create export-oriented R&D platforms without violating union obligations?

P.S. I attach the text of the appeal to the Administration of the President and the response of the National Academy of Sciences. Please take the attachment files from the appeals system. If necessary, I can provide the attachment files separately and give any necessary explanations.

I consider it unacceptable to lose foreign investors and to push innovative export-oriented projects out of Belarus.

Translation of the response of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/mid.pdf

In its response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs unfortunately provides no substantive explanations. The response also indicates that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Belarus does not know how partner countries of the EAEU carry out export activity and suggests asking them directly. The Ministry also advises us to contact the State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus.

Translation of the appeal to the State Committee for Standardization. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/in_gosstandart.pdf

To the State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus
Date of submission: 28 August 2026

I ask the State Committee for Standardization of the Republic of Belarus, within its competence, to provide detailed clarifications on how the development and production of food products intended exclusively for export outside the Eurasian Economic Union, without their release into civil circulation within the Union, are regulated legally and in practice.

When preparing the response, I ask you to take into account the context of my previous appeals:

1. Appeal to the Administration of the President of the Republic of Belarus No. 03072600000117 dated 30 June 2026, forwarded to the apparatus of the Council of Ministers and to the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus;
2. Appeal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus No. 03072600000141 dated 4 August 2026;
3. Response of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus No. 11-20/273 dated 20 July 2026, which states that "the creation of separate regulatory production facilities completely excluded from the unified EAEU regulatory framework is not provided for by current legislation";
4. Response of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus No. A-355, which contains general provisions on harmonization of standards.

An analysis of these responses, taken together with the objectives set in Chapter 2 of the State Programme of Socio-Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2026–2030 concerning market diversification, attraction of foreign direct investment, and increased non-resource exports, reveals systemic regulatory limitations. There is a justified concern that the current model of technical regulation de facto restricts innovation and production activity to the EAEU internal market, which directly correlates with the low indicators of non-resource exports and foreign direct investment noted in the Programme.

In addition, asymmetric conditions for producers are observed within the EAEU internal market. For example, the use of certain innovative ingredients — such as monk fruit extract — is permitted in products manufactured in Russia and supplied to Belarus, while Belarusian developers are denied similar opportunities even when the product is created exclusively for export to third countries, such as the United States or the EU, where these ingredients are approved by regulators.

The "Programme of Strategic Development of Technical Regulation of the Republic of Belarus until 2030" declares goals of increasing competitiveness and harmonizing standards. However, in practice, as follows from the responses of the National Academy of Sciences and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, export-oriented R&D projects encounter insurmountable administrative barriers and a lack of understanding of how other EAEU members export.

In connection with the above, I ask for concrete answers to the following questions:

1. Which specific normative legal acts of the Republic of Belarus — laws, decrees, resolutions, technical regulations — regulate the procedure for development, pilot production, and certification of food products intended exclusively for export outside the EAEU, without sale in the Union market? Please indicate norms providing exemptions or special regimes for such cases in order to support exports.
2. How is synchronization with global standards ensured in practice to preserve the competitive potential of Belarusian producers if, according to the response of the National Academy of Sciences, key R&D activity is concentrated in state organizations that focus exclusively on EAEU standards and national standards, whose harmonization with international standards is planned to reach only 85% by 2030?
3. What exactly is meant by "harmonization" in the food industry, given that the global food industry and standards — Codex Alimentarius, EFSA, FDA, and others — are a dynamically developing system requiring continuous R&D work linked to changing market needs? Please clarify the mechanisms for accounting for this dynamic specifically for external markets, without limiting the answer to the EAEU regulatory framework.
4. Does the State Committee for Standardization consider obtaining a voluntary Halal certificate — mentioned in the response of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs — a sufficient measure of technical regulation to ensure access of Belarusian products to markets with predominantly Muslim populations, or is this certificate only an addition that does not remove the main barriers associated with the mismatch of technical regulations?
5. If Gosstandart confirms the position of the National Academy of Sciences that national R&D and industry are strictly bound by international EAEU treaties — which also underlies the problematic theses of Chapter 2 of the Programme — is the Committee ready to initiate a legislative proposal to create a regulatory sandbox or to separate regulation: one regime for processes within the EAEU and another for export-oriented foreign economic activity?

Attachments:

• Copy of the appeal to the Administration of the President No. 03072600000117 dated 30 June 2026;
• Copy of the response of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus No. 11-20/273 dated 20 July 2026;
• Copy of the appeal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs No. 03072600000141 dated 4 August 2026;
• Copy of the response of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs No. A-355.

The response of the State Committee for Standardization is published below.

Translation of the response of the State Committee for Standardization. Russian original: stasyalex.by/docs/gosstandart.pdf

Original document: Programme of Socio-Economic Development of the Republic of Belarus for 2026–2030

Chapter 2. Current Problems and Prospects of Modern Development

The key risks for Belarus are low country diversification of exports and an insufficiently differentiated export commodity structure with a predominance of raw-material goods. The share of high-tech goods in exports remains low — 5.4 percent, while in China it is 25 percent. The share of investment goods has practically not changed and remains at the level of 10–12 percent; in 2024 it was 12.2 percent. At the same time, the share of other intermediate goods — raw materials, materials, and components — is high, at more than 50 percent.

It is necessary to strengthen the turn of national exports to the markets of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America, to increase supply volumes to the markets of the Commonwealth of Independent States, and to raise the share of high-technology, medium-high-technology, and knowledge-intensive products in the export structure.

The Republic of Belarus retains a number of systemic imbalances: a low technological structure; a chronically low level of implementation of research and development results and patents; a weak mechanism of interaction between science, production, and education; a shortage of scientific personnel; insufficient use of the private sector's potential; low investment activity; and limited long-term investment resources in the financial sector.

It is necessary to raise investment activity, create industrial parks with ready infrastructure, and stimulate the inflow of foreign direct investment into the economy.

Section 7.2. Raising the Knowledge Intensity of the Economy and Accelerating Innovative Development

Indicators: internal expenditure on research and development as a share of GDP should reach at least 1 percent by 2030, compared to 0.59 percent in 2024; the share of innovation-active organizations among surveyed manufacturing organizations should reach at least 45% by 2030, compared to 40% in 2024.

The Programme provides for the development of scientific support in priority areas, increasing the effectiveness of commercialization of intellectual property, strengthening the integration of academic, university, and sectoral science, expanding interaction between economic entities and scientific organizations, improving financing of scientific, scientific-technical, and innovative activity, forming an institutional environment that stimulates innovation, and developing institutions for supporting scientific and technical activity — technology parks, technology transfer centres, business incubators, engineering companies, and technological platforms.

Section 7.5. Country and Commodity Diversification of Exports

Indicators: growth of exports of goods and services should be at least 1.2 times over the five-year period; diversification of foreign trade through an increased share of the "far arc" countries should reach 30 percent by 2030, compared to 19.1 percent in 2024; the share of high-technology, medium-high-technology, and knowledge-intensive products in exports of goods and services should reach at least 44 percent by 2030, compared to 38.1 percent in 2024.

The Programme provides for increasing food and agricultural raw material exports to 10–12 billion US dollars by 2030, expanding geography, developing trade and economic relations with South-East Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America, stimulating shipments to "far arc" countries, and improving export support mechanisms.