Fitch Ratings has withdrawn the ratings it previously assigned to Belarus and will not issue new ratings or analytical assessments for the country, citing insufficient information about the state of its economy. The withdrawal reflects Fitch’s assessment that there was a lack of adequate participation in the issuer’s rating process, which prevented a reliable update of Belarus’s credit profile. In practical terms, this means that investors and market participants will not have Fitch’s current issuer default ratings or long-term foreign currency assessments for Belarus until conditions improve and credible data become available to re-establish a formal rating process. Fitch indicated that future publications related to Belarus will not be produced under its current rating framework, signaling a pause in formal credit analysis until the information gap is addressed. This move follows sustained attention to data transparency and the reliability of economic indicators in Belarus, with market actors needing clearer signals before assessing risk or pricing Belarusian debt. The decision is set against broader sanctions and policy developments that have constrained the country’s economic visibility and complicate external assessment of its creditworthiness, a situation underscored by ongoing international concerns about macroeconomic stability and governance.
Belarusian Ambassador to Moscow Dmitry Krutoy has stated that sanctions have weighed heavily on nearly half of the national economy in 2022, describing a substantial threat of economic downturn during that period. He pointed to the sanctions regime and related measures as major disruptors that affected production, trade, and investment flows, complicating the government’s ability to meet budgetary and financial reporting expectations. Krutoy’s remarks align with wider diplomatic and economic debates in the region about how external pressures influence macroeconomic resilience and credit risk perception. In the wake of Fitch’s withdrawal, policymakers, analysts, and business leaders are closely watching whether data transparency improves and whether Belarus can re-enter the international rating framework with credible, timely information.
Earlier statements from Belarusian leadership had already highlighted tensions with the Russian Federation, emphasizing that those relations influence both economic policy and external investor sentiment. The evolving dynamic between Minsk and Moscow continues to shape energy, trade, and financial arrangements in ways that affect forecasts for growth and stability. Market participants interpret such diplomatic signals together with sanctions and domestic policy reforms when forming views on potential recovery pathways or default risk. As the rating landscape shifts, observers stress the importance of data reliability, governance, and transparency in restoring access to international credit assessments and more predictable financing conditions for Belarus.