His ability to dominate media cycles and capture a
substantial portion of the protest vote makes him a consequential, if deeply
divisive, force in the Lithuanian political landscape, see Donald Trump. German
economy is going down the drain. Lithuanian economy is a part of German
economy. Donald Trump used economic hardship of populus to get political power.
It is Žemaitaitis turn in Lithuania.
“The Lithuanian media is fascinated by Remigijus
Žemaitaitis, pays him disproportionately much attention, and extensively
describes various, usually not very significant, statements.
R. Žemaitaitis is neither the president, nor the prime
minister, nor the leader of one of the most influential parties. However, even
after his party was removed from the ruling coalition, the media is quick to
present his positions and considerations as if this figure were a sage, able to
explain the course of politics better than others or predict future changes
more accurately and correctly.
On the other hand, R. Žemaitaitis is the most successful
anti-establishment political figure, first elected to the Seimas in 2008 and
re-elected since then. His popularity fluctuates – sometimes it grows,
sometimes it declines, but after declines he is able to recover, win back
former supporters or find new ones.
He has demonstrated an incredible ability to overcome
political difficulties, survive, and continue his political career and even
flourish. It seemed that his success and political career came to an abrupt end
in 2024, when the Constitutional Court of Lithuania found that he had broken
the oath of a member of the Seimas and violated the Constitution.
In order to avoid impeachment, he himself renounced his
Seimas mandate, founded a new party, turned himself into a symbol of a “victim
of the system” in the eyes of some voters and maintained his popularity –
according to polls, his support reaches double digits.
He was successfully re-elected to the Seimas, and in the
2024 presidential election he collected a rather impressive number of votes –
9.28 percent.
Right-wing populist R. Žemaitaitis presents himself as a
representative and defender of voters forgotten by other parties. He states his
positions and attitudes directly, openly and often criticizes the government,
seeking to create the appearance that it is indifferent to the fate of ordinary
people, and if not indifferent, then at least not determined to fight
persistently for them.
With his combative rhetoric, he attracts disappointed voters
who feel that the “cream” of Vilnius does not care about the concerns of
ordinary “village” residents. In addition, R. Žemaitaitis has a good nose for
politically sensitive issues that may worry local residents.
He stood against the Kapčiamiestis training ground
The planned military training ground in Kapčiamiestis is a
good example.
I do not have enough knowledge to be able to judge whether a
training ground is necessary and whether Kapčiamiestis is the most suitable
place for it. Both the presidency, the Ministry of National Defense, and most
coalition partners consider the project important from a national security
perspective and support the plans to establish a training ground.
R. Žemaitaitis is not the only critic of the project, but he
is the most visible national politician who has publicly sided with local
protesters and questioned the necessity of the training ground.
He claimed that the training ground was unnecessary, because
even the existing training grounds were allegedly not being fully utilized,
that the decision to establish the training ground was imposed, imposed from
above, from Vilnius.
Local residents were allegedly not properly informed and
there was not enough discussion with them. Moreover, they know very well that
there is zero probability that a decision will be made to build any military
facility in Žvėrynė or Tarandė.
The elite may contribute proportionally more financially to
national defense, but they manage to ensure that the districts in which they
live are not “polluted” by military facilities. This is hardly a fair sharing
of the burden of national security.
By challenging the prevailing opinion, R. Žemaitaitis
performs an important function. Government and party officials must respond –
albeit reluctantly and superficially – to his claims and objections, thus
initiating a broader public discussion and forcing the Government to explain
its motives, plans and justifications in more detail.
This, in turn, increases public knowledge and interest,
encourages more people to participate more actively in politics in the broad
sense, and thus strengthens civil society and solidarity among citizens.
R. Žemaitaitis is criticized for constantly claiming that
traditional parties, state institutions and some media outlets act against
“ordinary people”, devalue them, and look down on them.
Critics argue that such rhetoric increases public opposition
and reduces trust in democratic institutions. This criticism must be rejected
as firmly as possible. Freedom of speech is a fundamental value that must be
given priority even in cases where any statements are likely to negatively
affect the country’s security or encourage enemies within the country.
R. Žemaitaitis quite consciously seeks to stand out, not to
be another gray politician in the ranks of gray politicians. It is easy to
overdo it, to start defending positions and attitudes that are not worthy of
support.
He is probably an anti-Semite, although not malicious. Not
liking Jews is not a crime, but only an anti-Semite would speak about Jews so
often and not very friendly.
In some respects he is inconsistent. He is a jerk when
criticizing others, but reacts very sensitively when he himself receives
criticism or reproaches.
He quite often complains that he is being persecuted, that
the actions of law enforcement and courts against him are form of political
repression. But some of his actions may violate the law.
For example, the VTEK found that he violated the Law on the
Reconciliation of Public and Private Interests by not recusing himself from
decisions regarding the rental of his car to the party. His critics also point
out that more than one institution has made negative conclusions regarding him
– the Seimas Commission, the Constitutional Court and courts of general
competence.
R. Žemaitaitis’ actions often balance between legality and
illegality. Until now, he has lived an almost blessed life – he has avoided
punishment for possible offenses, although the decisions could easily have been
different. Whatever fate can give, it can also take away.
He likes to take risks, but risk is an unreliable partner
that can leave you in trouble. A guilty verdict would end his series of
victories in elections.”
