How Lithuania overcame Belarus, China and even Russia in two years

"The whole democratic world is probably envious of Lithuania's foreign policy. Because no Western country, except Lithuania, has been able to end relations with two powerful dictatorships (China, Russia) and one small but neighboring country in less than two years. For "you are what you feel you are," as the new wisdom of our time proclaims.

 

If catharsis could strike not only man but also the state, then Lithuania would already be deeply in catharsis. Because the citizens of no other Western state have been allowed to become spectators of such a round-up and morally inspiring work of art as demonstrated by Lithuanian foreign and security policy architects.

 

The words of the anthem "Lithuania <...>, you are the land of heroes", turn out to be not about the country's distant past, but about the present of foreign policy. The Hipster working group, which created the slogan "Lithuania is a brave country" fourteen years ago, apparently sensed that we would remind the whole world of ourselves, either by repeating the war of Grand Duke Algirdas against Moscow or by blocking transit to Kaliningrad.

 

When Matas Maldeikis talked about the recovery of Smolensk, I was sincerely happy. It seemed that we would choose the traditional path and beat Moscow again. We were probably already on the right track when we were the only ones in Europe to recall an ambassador to Russia, showing that this time we will deal with the old enemy alone - even without Poland.

 

But now that we have hit the Russians in an even more sensitive place, it is only wondering why Vincas Kudirka did not write "from the future" instead of writing "your son is looking for strength from the past". That future is here and now, the moment when the regulation of EU sanctions and Lithuania's legal obligations regarding transit to Kaliningrad are interpreted as required by our courage.

 

Hopefully, the escalation of the situation on the third front (with Russia) will not force those officials who explained back in December that China is our main enemy, to start facing cognitive dissonance.

 

That is what a real foreign policy, not a played one, must look like. We have lived for a long time hearing a lot about values, listening to them being run by electoral parties and politicians, but every time we are disappointed to see what is left of those languages ​​when speakers win the election and take over the helm of power. Because there is very little left.

 

How much more could it have suffered? Let us remember 2008 - the year when the wonderful slogan about "Lithuania - a brave country" was created. The Seimas elections were then won by a political party promoting a valuable foreign policy. But its foreign minister shocked voters in the first months of his job by saying a new page in relations with Russia needed to be opened. In other words, make love, not war.

 

It is a betrayal of value thinking in foreign policy. And it was probably later decided that this should not happen again. Which is very cute and definitely welcome.

 

It is gratifying when a political force not only knows well what it wants, but also demonstrates some consistency in value thinking. Not only does it adhere to the declared principles and values, but it is also able to defend that value attitude in the public space with arguments, revealing and explaining the internal logic of the political worldview.

 

However, value attitudes can face challenges that are very difficult to cope with. One such challenge is reality. Reality. What can force a surprised voter to start asking awkward questions about the authors and executors of value policy.

 

And in this situation again, a strong admiration for the courage of the great foreign policy heroes should be expressed. The courage to rise up and be above reality, not to succumb to its whispering temptations. After all, reality draws us to the earth and what is earthly, and values  ​​encourage us to break up and rise. Get off the ground. Break away from reality.

 

It is worth not only admiration but also awards. Not every politician has a connection to hold the helm of a state ship and try to ascend to that sky with that ship in spite of the gravity of reality. Ours are not really afraid.

 

And this is evidenced by far more examples of the values  ​​and attitudes of this term.

 

That is the conflict with China. Initially, it was decided to completely ignore the fact that in response to the opening of a Taiwanese representative office on behalf of Taiwan, the Chinese would start an economic war, which would be extremely painful for both Lithuanian business and ordinary consumers. But values ​​are more important than the awkward reality that awaits.

 

The rulers then talked about how the losses caused by the conflict with China would be offset by the contribution of Taiwan and the United States to Lithuania's economic prosperity. Unfortunately, the reality is quite different. China's revenge on Lithuania remains one of the most important factors damaging our economy this year, and Taiwan maintains very close economic ties with China, with which we are currently at war, and is in no hurry to invest in Lithuania.

 

Our value policies fall short of not only economic but also political reality. Both US diplomats and influential think tank analysts who visited Lithuania denied the government's revelation about the alleged coincidence of Lithuanian and US positions and the full support of Americans for our policy towards Taiwan.

 

Representatives of Lithuanian values ​​policy, who visited the United States as part of the Seimas delegation six months ago, explained that the United States would soon change the name of the Taiwanese mission, and this step would be the best proof that we had done everything well and correctly.

 

What do we see? The Americans did not change  the Taiwanese mission name, and Bonie Glaser, head of the Asian Research Program at the German Marshall Fund in the United States, who visited Lithuania a month ago, openly noted:

 

"I would just urge your government to assess the benefits and risks of different actions. Sometimes Taiwanese politicians call on my government to do things that I don’t think are necessarily in America’s interests. They may serve the interests of Taiwan, they may not serve. Taiwan, for example, has been urging the United States to change the name of its Taiwan mission since the start of the Donald Trump administration. So far, the US has not done so. And I say publicly, I don't think the United States should allow Taiwan to change the name of the mission."

 

However, the ability of value politics to break away from reality, to rise above it, and to live somewhere beyond the sinful City of Man makes it impossible to hear such remarks at all and to continue to adhere in principle to regulations that have nothing to do with reality.

 

Not only that, it allows state leaders to say to their constituents: "We are the first in the European Union to dare to challenge China to Taiwan."

 

It’s very much like a lie. Because you can be the first unless there is a second, a third, and the last. And when there is neither the second nor the last, you are not the first, but simply the only one. And when you’re the only one, there are basically two options for assessment: either only you are smart and everyone else isn’t, or vice versa.

 

Valuers choose the first option. Because they are very brave, as already mentioned.

 

Their policy towards Belarus was also bold and allowed them to ignore reality. "I have no doubt that the protests will resume in the spring. "We should not see the temporary pauses as a sign that the protests are over," said one of our foreign policy leaders last March.

 

These statements by him are a good reflection of the relationship of our valuable foreign policy to the truth. His first statement is that he did not even doubt that the mass protests in Belarus that we saw last year should have been revived last year. Are they reborn? No, not reborn. And was there reason to doubt that they would be reborn? It really was. That’s why he didn’t doubt it? Because to doubt such things is very bold and valuable.

 

"We should not see the pauses as a sign that the protests are over." (Although that is exactly what happened: the protests ended). Why are we being told in general what and how we should evaluate? And why are such assessments being blatantly contradictory? Because reality is the seed of the devil. It needs to be pushed as far away from itself as possible - along with the mind that naturally opposes it.

 

We also became the only ones in Europe on the war front with Russia. The only ones who have recalled the ambassador. Have we helped Ukraine in any way? Is it very important to her now? Is it easier for her? No. But as the knights of our values ​​policy would say, we are "first." As with Taiwan. The second and third are not there at all, but we are the "first".

 

There is nothing left to add about the transit of Kaliningrad in this context. Some say we could have been more careful to see how the EU sanctions regulation correlates with the exemption for Kaliningrad transit. But what? After all, there is a win-win: the Russians get the dream pretext they wish, and we have the historic opportunity to be at the forefront of NATO's eastern front. We are the first.

 

Seriously, the most important question in this situation is not even the application of sanctions for transit to Kaliningrad and their interpretation, but the title of Raimundas Lopata's latest article: "How will we defend every centimeter of Lithuania?" And what it says openly:

 

"It turned out that at the military level we are not ready for changes in the geopolitical reality ... Even after the annexation of Crimea, we have had so much time and do not even have the basic infrastructure to receive NATO troops. What was it - sabotage, negligence? Maybe who of the former and the present will say - I am guilty - and explain? How did it happen that some of the weapons that had been bought so far did not work? ”

 

That is the reality. And to be "first" on the three front lines of war (with China, Russia and Belarus), after a sharp fuss over national security issues and getting Politico to write about Lithuania as the most dangerous place in the world, is bold. Courage is about values; the reality is not.

 

That is why we follow the rules: reality is for rulers, values are for us. That is the formula for our new foreign and security policy. "Brave Country" operation algorithm.

 

And it is good that there are political forces that have the courage and principledness to think and act in this way and not the other way around and to follow the chosen path. After all, we live in a democracy where citizens can choose what to vote for.

 

It will therefore suffice to lament and whine about the mismatch of value policy with someone’s expectations. Let us be more positive and celebrate democracy. Or, as they say in the internal life of the controversial armies, let us not resist and try to experience pleasure."