What is wrong with Lithuanian foreign policy

   "The narrative of political and economic liberalization as a universal measure and direction of state progress has long since lost its mythological power in the East. In Ghodsee and Orenstein's book Taking stock of shock: : The Social Consequences of the 1989 Revolution ") reveals the real cost to post-Soviet societies of shock therapy. The mortality rate has risen sharply since 1986. The sharp rise in human mortality during the transformation is primarily the result of a sharp rise in the atomisation of society, income and wealth inequality, unemployment and psychosocial stress.

 

    It seems that our country’s foreign policy strategists are successfully ignoring these trends and still follow outdated transitology textbooks published 20 years ago (Carothers 2002). In other words, we greatly overestimate free and competitive elections not only as a necessary but also as a sufficient condition for democracy, as if in itself to guarantee equal rights and opportunities for all people. In this way, we turn a blind eye to the fact that, even in the event of such elections, the state may be seized by oligarchic groups, which, as the case of Ukraine shows, are often robbing more than unilateral dictators. And so we are "losing" the decline of democracy in some of the EU's Central and Eastern European countries, such as Poland or Hungary, where the media, the legal system and the state apparatus are unconditionally subordinated to one party (Mungiu-Pippidi 2015). .

 

    By being blind to what is happening in our backyards, we are boldly and principally fighting the 'hybrid war' with the regimes of Putin and Lukashenko. Our fervor has already reached such a degree that we can sacrifice, in good conscience, the freezing Afghans, Iraqis and Syrians and their children in the border forests. And we hear in particular about Merkel's talks to manage this refugee crisis. Because we have decided for ourselves and solemnly promised that we will never, under any circumstances, talk or negotiate with any "illegitimate" dictators, even if they are our neighbors.

 

    Related to this is the last dilemma of Lithuania's foreign policy - how to distance itself from the Homeland Union - the desire of the Lithuanian Christian Democrats (TS-LKD) to hold it hostage. There are two issues at stake. First, in Lithuania, especially among the right, the idea of ​​the interwar German philosopher Carl Schmitt regarding the separation of "friend-enemy" as a basic dimension of politics is popular. According to the banal understanding of this idea, if you want to create a policy, look for enemies. Second, the Conservatives have, from the outset, sought to set the tone for the country’s foreign policy and have seen it as one of the key signs that sets them apart from other political forces. Such a narrative has long been quite difficult to defend, as all the country's parliamentary parties have supported Euro-Atlantic integration. Russia in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and the growing aggression, fostering good relations with it has also become purely theoretical. However, the prevailing consensus on the main goals of foreign policy, which is already a guarantee of its coherence and success, poses an existential threat to the Conservative Party. Already during the last elections to the Seimas, the Conservative Party did not find much how the Conservative Party could stand out from other competitors, unless  using the  leadership of nonmember I. Šimonytė.

 

    The sudden change in the course of Chinese politics, not much coordinated with the country's president, let alone other political parties, is nothing more than an attempt by  the Conservative Party, primarily interested in its survival, to reinvent itself in search of new enemies and areas of struggle. This is the party’s response to the radical right challenge at the expense of the old foreign policy consensus. The openly confrontational choice to name the Taiwanese representation not in the name of Taipei, as requested by the Chinese side, but as "Taiwanese", is a symbolic step towards redefining the right-to-left political divide in Lithuania. It’s a dangerous and not very playful game that can backfire.”

By impoverishing the Lithuanian people, the Conservative Party believes that it will remain in power during the next elections. Are we really that stupid?