VILNIUS, Lithuania — The Baltic states form a virtual isthmus jutting out from the rest of the NATO alliance and butting up against the heavily fortified Russian military outpost in Kaliningrad, which has the capability to impose anti-access/aerial denial over the region.
Lithuania shares borders with both Kaliningrad to the west and Russian military partner Belarus in the south. A NATO partner since 2004, Lithuania is on the eastern flank of the alliance and faces unique defense challenges in an era of increased Russian aggressiveness.
On the sidelines of the Tobruq Legacy 2020 multinational aerial defense exercises, the Washington Examiner sat down for interviews in Vilnius with Lithuanian Minister of Defense Raimundas Karoblis and Minister of Foreign Affairs Linas Linkevicius to discuss these unique security challenges.
The following is an edited excerpt of the two interviews.
Defense Minister Raimundas Karoblis
Washington Examiner: Do you believe Russia poses a threat to Lithuania today?
Karoblis: “Vilnius was the gift of Stalin to Lithuania, and now [some Russian politicians are saying], ‘Maybe we need to take Vilnius back, and this area would become part of the common union state between Russia and Belarus.’ Some politicians are saying [the Lithuanian port of] Kleipeda should not belong to Lithuania. It was a gift of Stalin to Lithuania in the same way that Crimea was a gift of Khrushchev to Ukraine.
“It’s absolutely clear that Russia is the conventional military risk, of course, [for] NATO. This is without any doubts and why we need these NATO guarantees, NATO presence in Lithuania.”
Washington Examiner: What presence do you have of American and NATO troops, and what is the message sent to Russia?
Karoblis: “[We have NATO] Enhanced Forward Presence, and now, we have the American battalion in Lithuania and other assets. These measures, they are a demonstration, of course, to Russia that NATO, in case of crisis and in case of armed conflict, these countries will be defended by NATO.
“These measures are cheaper than, for example, abandoning these countries during [a] war, for example, and then taking [them] back. Let’s not have [any] illusions regarding Russia. It’s recognized that in the middle term, from the unconventional [perspective], it’s definitely a threat for NATO, for the West, No. 1.”
Washington Examiner: Secretary [Mark] Esper has expressed interest in increasing rotational troop presence on the eastern flank of NATO. Would Lithuania welcome more U.S. troops?
Karoblis: “Now, we are already spending more than 2%. We are transcending it. It’s expanding. We are defending the eastern flank of NATO. First of all, the role of Americans here, the importance is impossible to overvalue. It’s very, very important. So, we are really grateful to all Allied troops but, of course, the presence of U.S. troops. It’s doubling and tripling the deterrence factor. The signaling is very important.
“We would like [a] permanent rotational presence, that a battalion-sized unit would stay. Of course, rotations are very much understandable, practically all the time during the year. We would like, of course, a bigger presence, even on land. Of course, [there is also] the gap of air defense. So, its very, very important. The specificity of the region, its proximity to the border with Russia, and the critical issue of early warning indicators, of course. I think that this presence of U.S. and also NATO with these capabilities would be in the interest of Lithuania and also the NATO border countries.”
Minister of Foreign Affairs Linas Linkevicius
Washington Examiner: Are you concerned that Russia will send troops to Belarus to shore up Alexander Lukashenko?
Linkevicius: “Factually, it’s not logical. It could be even more complicated for Russia itself. I don’t believe they will do that. Of course, we are concerned, but I hope it will not happen because that’s one more issue.
“We should understand that Belarusians in general and all these new faces we now have seen, they are not against Russia. They made these statements many times. They are not in favor of the European Union. They would like to have their own leader selected. So, for Russia, it shouldn’t be bad to have a normal way of development, but maybe they are considering this as a weakness. If people [are] having a say and then those leaders they used to support retreated, maybe they think — I may [be making] an assumption — maybe they think that it could be messaged back home in Russia.”
Washington Examiner: Aren’t some Russian troops already in Belarus?
Linkevicius: “For exercises, Slavic Union or whatever. And the Russian troops are on the soil exercising how to defend [an] attack from NATO, [and] nobody is attacking. But it was repeatedly said that NATO is threatening, ready to go even, which is nonsense. It’s very easy to verify it. And we will not respond to any of these provocations just to prove this rhetoric, which is fake, but how can you simply neglect if [they’re] talking about that? And these troops, these troops [are] deployed, as they say, to defend [their] borders, which nobody is attacking.”
Washington Examiner: Do you perceive that Lukashenko is willing to negotiate a transition?
Linkevicius: “No. He wants to stay in power at any expense. That would be my reading, at any expense. Even at the expense of Belarus’s remaining sovereignty and independence. All the while, through rhetoric, he was always portraying himself as a guarantor of independence or something like that. But he demasked this rhetoric totally after he asked [for] military assistance [from] Russia, and then, that’s it. So, he will do whatever he can do to stay in power. But he should understand, I believe he will not be needed [by] Russia very soon.”
Washington Examiner: Can you talk about the importance of the U.S. defense partnership?
Linkevicius: “It’s extremely important. We have also a kind of cooperation with our NATO allies, we have Enhanced Forward Presence with Germany as a framework nation and [what the] U.S. is doing [is] in parallel, and this is extremely important. We all understand the presence of U.S. troops is by itself, in whatever quantity, already [a] factor for deterrence. The numbers are not too big. It’s very important to have this permanent.
“It’s not a huge presence of troops in all three Baltic states. We have a lot of gaps of capabilities. We’re not going to compete with anybody, and we definitely need our allies’ presence [with] all these gaps — air defense in particular. You know, we do not have our own jets, all three Baltic states [are] relying on air policing by our allies. This is definitely not offensive. It’s not nothing threatening, but [there is a] big noise on the other side, that NATO [is] showing muscles or whatever.
“We value very much what is done by NATO, by allies, by [the] U.S. in particular. When I was in D.C., we talked about these issues. I said we really would like to have this permanent hub of U.S. troops. We’ll try really, to do the best with regard to host nation support, provide the conditions, and I believe [there is] reciprocal interest with a training place. For us, [it is] also very important, a vivid demonstration of solidarity and security guarantees, [an] important message to [the] outside world, because the outside world, unfortunately, as we can see, is really not stable.”
