“We have to stop the aggression in Ukraine because…”

“We have learned our lessons not only in Ukraine, but in Georgia as well.”

“My personal position is not to stop but to prevent aggression”.

“We have an example of Germany. Germany was occupied by Russia, but it became a member of NATO”.

“The issue that NATO will not expand has never been discussed at any meeting.”

“The discussions about Georgia were about either awarding MAP or Essential Package.”

“Expansion will take place. The process started in 2008 in Bucharest that gave way to the open door perspective for Georgia and Ukraine”.

 

-We are in Vilnius – the capital of the state which is a member of the EU and NATO; however, despite the above fact, we can read daily analytical articles stating that there exists some fear…the fear that the Baltic countries may find themselves on the list after Ukraine. The President of Lithuania made multiple announcements that Ukraine is not the final point where Putin is trying to demonstrate his strength. Do you really think that the next target after Ukraine will be the Baltic countries?

-It is very difficult to answer the question. However, nothing could be excluded. It is really possible and any Baltic state may become Russia’s next target. That’s why we should strengthen our defense; we should work in this direction together with NATO.

The decisions have been made in Wells on making practical steps which means that Lithuania, on its part, should work on strengthening its self defense. You may well know that we have substantially increased our defense budget. The political parties of Lithuania reached an agreement on this subject. NATO sent its military personnel. We are glad to have our friends from the USA, Portugal, and Germany… We are waiting for the representatives of other countries as well. The decisions on the NATO High Readiness Forces, involvement of the NATO International Forces…all the current support proceeding from the threats refer to the fact that Article 5 of the Washington Treaty has been invoked. We are ready to protect the NATO member states.

 – Does that mean that invoking article 5 will be sufficient?

– Of course, there is no reasonable doubt to think that Article 5 will not be sufficient. When there were debates within NATO on the commencement of an operation in Afghanistan, all member states participated in the process of making this decision, including Georgia. This fact confirms that we act jointly. Right now, there is no threat against the NATO member states; however, NATO has assesses the risks and demonstrated its readiness. The Alliance declares openly that it is ready to defend the NATO space at all costs.

– What are the lessons learned by, for example, Lithuania or NATO after the Russian aggression in Ukraine or after the annexation of Crimea? President Porochenko states that the war has not ended, yet!

– We have learned our lesson not only in Ukraine, but in Georgia as well. I will try to explain what I mean: number one is the necessity for readiness – to be able to respond at early phase.

Why am I saying this? I will elaborate on my statement: Russia can act extremely rapidly. This country needs hours or days, and not months or years, to demonstrate its aggression and strength. Hence, we decided and found it necessary to improve the level of readiness of the member states. We have two battalions for this purpose; they can act briskly.

During Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, we only started to mull over the ways on how to react to its actions after Russia had already occupied a part of the country.

It is essential to involve the member states in the preparatory processes taking place on our territories. It will strengthen our cooperation, make the process more efficient and teach us how to act in case of similar aggression.

-You have mentioned the 2008 Russia-Georgian war. Many European leaders, politicians and experts say that what is going on in Ukraine now is the reverberation of the 2008 war. Do you agree with such statements?

– Yes, I fully agree with the position. In 2008, when the Defense Ministers of NATO member states were discussing the possible actions, personally I, like many my colleagues, tried to intensify the importance of the issue. We were saying that Georgia couldn’t have been the last target of Russia.

Similar steps were made in case of Georgia – international community got actively involved in the process (the President of France was very effective). They came to some agreement. However, the results demonstrated that the agreement could not eliminate the problem, which, in my opinion, enabled Putin to repeat it once again on the territory of another country – Ukraine.

All NATO member states agree that it has been a good lesson; we should reflect and learn, and we should pay attention to the details! We should not go on living without proper reaction.

That’s why it is so important for NATO to demonstrate that it is ready to act relevantly in similar cases if Russia decides to demonstrate its aggression against the NATO member states.

My personal position is not to stop but to prevent aggression.

-The Bucharest summit was held before the war; however, the member states were not ready to award MAP to Georgia. Do you think that the armed hostilities in Georgia and later in Ukraine could have been prevented if the above decision had been made?

– It is very difficult to say what might have happened. However, I can tell you my position – we could have avoided the war; had the decision been made, it could have hampered or even eliminated the possibility of carrying out such aggression.

– The NATO member states say that the Wells summit was important for the partners. Presently, Georgia does not have MAP but we do have the Essential Package. The Wells summit declaration states that the Essential Package will assist Georgia to get ready for membership. You were actively involved in the process and discussions. Could you tell us how the decision on awarding Georgia the Essential Package was made? What preceded the decision?

-I am going to be very sincere – we discussed two alternatives: either awarding MAP or Essential Package. There were countries supporting the idea of awarding MAP to Georgia. It should also be said that their support was very strong, and Lithuania was among them. We discussed the issue of readiness. However, the decision was made to award Georgia the Essential Package, which was the recognition of the steps and activities made by your country.

Awarding the Essential Package means the realization and recognition of the fact that Georgia is an important partner in, for example, different international missions conducted by NATO.

The Package is an additional opportunity to continue reforms and get ready for the final phase of the membership with the assistance and involvement of NATO member states. Lithuania is ready to assist Georgia.

We will send military personnel for conducting training. They will also get involved in the development of the Doctrine. We will be active to the extent possible to help and support Georgia.

– You mentioned there were two alternatives – awarding either MAP or Essential Package. Could you tell us why the consensus on awarding MAP could not have been achieved?

– There were objective and subjective reasons including Georgia’s need for higher level of preparedness and reforms in the sphere of defense.

The country is on the path of strengthening its democracy. On the other hand, there were talks about Russian influence. Russian aggression is occupation and, of course, the fact of occupied territories also influenced the decision made by some member states.

-Do you think that occupied territories are the impediment that can hamper Georgia’s membership in the future, too?

On the one hand – yes, it can; however, on the other hand – it cannot.

– Why yes, and why – no?

-Yes, it can impede Georgia’s membership because it is Russian influence on the territory that forms certain approaches of and mindsets in some member states.

However, it cannot impede Georgia’s membership because we have the example of Germany. Germany was occupied by Russia; however, it became the NATO member state!!!

There exists an example of the fact that despite having territorial problems, a country can become the NATO member state. Such precedent gives Georgia possibility of becoming a member of the organization despite occupation and territorial problems. Everything will be decided when Georgia meets the criteria necessary for NATO membership.

-Essential Package envisages opening of NATO-Georgia Joint Training Center in Georgia. The Secretary General said that NATO would evaluate the announcements made by Russia related to the Center until the end of the year.  What is your, as of the Defense Minister of Lithuania, vision of and response to such kind of announcements made by Russia?

– We are ready to send military personnel and instructors to Georgia.

The Center has to be opened!

No third country can decide, instead of us, what the Alliance can or cannot do.

-What do you think the purpose of that announcement might be?

-I remember Lithuania being an aspirant country. Similar announcements were made by Russia then, too.

Russia’s position was formed under the ruling of the present leader long ago and it stays unchanged.

-Do you think NATO expansion is possible in the nearest years?

– I think it is. We discuss this issue at different meetings and in different formats. We always send the message that the NATO door is open and expansion should take place; expansion is possible when a country decides to join the Alliance and when it is ready to meet the requirements and liabilities.

– The President of France said several months ago that for the time being NATO should not allow the aspirant countries to become its members – this is the position of France. Are NATO expansion and Open Door Policy on the agenda of the Alliance at this stage?

– It is true that NATO member states do make such statements about the expansion. However, I would like to assure you that during internal discussions we have never said that the NATO door is closed. On the contrary, we always underline that the door is open for the countries that will satisfy the requirements.

-What are the perspectives of the Warsaw summit?

It is rather difficult to say anything so far. We will know more when the time of the summit comes. We still have more than a year before it.

– Do you think the Essential Package will be sufficient for membership? Is it possible to become the NATO member without MAP?

– Taking into consideration the present conditions, MAP is most likely a formal step. Essential Package is a very strong position. It is a step forward. We’ll have to wait and see how it will work.

I can observe progress, huge progress, in the defense sphere, in the armed forces. The reforms are implemented rapidly, and that is obvious. Essential Package is essential as it approximates with the NATO standards.

– Do you think that the future of Ukraine, along with Georgia, is with NATO? How would you assess the situation? What can the next steps of Ukraine be?

-I think that if Ukraine decides, it will meet the criteria; there will be the opportunity to do so; however, it depends on the country itself.

As for NATO, I am sure the expansion will take place. The process started in 2008 in Bucharest that gave way to the open door perspective for Georgia and Ukraine.

– Has the war in Ukraine hampered the NATO expansion policy?

– Yes, it turned out to be a factor hampering the process since it became more difficult to develop, carry out reforms, and fight against corruption. That happened due to the military actions. On the other hand – no, it cannot be a hampering factor since Ukraine started to develop its relations with NATO.  We do believe that Ukrainians do not fight for Ukraine, only. They fight for us, too – for Europeans, for our values, for Europe, and for NATO. And, we have to stop that aggression because, as you have mentioned in your first question, we should avoid the next one that might be directed to us.