"As Russia caused hysteria over restricting the transit
of goods to the Kaliningrad region, politicians reiterated this week that
things were going according to plan: European sanctions were in place, which
were known in March. But limited to abstract assurances that everything
is fine talking is scarry and questions are growing.
For example, why, knowing in the spring that the transit of
certain goods would have to be restricted, the Lithuanian representatives who
participated in the adoption of this decision later asked the European
Commission (EC) whether this ban was really valid. Public policy statements
have shown that Russia could have been informed of the sanctions even without a
response from the EC.
Questions also arise as to why, in anticipation of Russia's
turbulent reaction, no one has bothered to devise any strategy to counter it.
Foreign media, based on sources in Brussels, are already
suggesting that Lithuania may have broken the stick - that it is really about
increased cargo inspections so that there are no attempts to circumvent
sanctions, rather than a ban on transporting certain goods to Russia's domestic
market.
On Thursday, Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said the EC
could theoretically change its mind about restricting transit in Kaliningrad,
and President Gitanas Nausėda confirmed that the EC's interpretation would be
clarified.
Nobody wants to explain in detail how the issue was handled
in Lithuania for almost a week during the discussions on Kaliningrad transit.
There was no EC explanation on Saturday yet?
The news about the ban on the transportation of certain
goods to Kaliningrad, which came into force on Saturday midnight, was first
published in the foreign media, according to a statement by the governor of
Kaliningrad.
On the same Saturday, Lithuanian Railways explained that it
was implementing EU sanctions, and Deputy Foreign Minister Mantas Adomėnas
stated that the Russians would use it for propaganda.
"We are currently awaiting the EC's clarification
regarding the application of the European sanctions regime to Kaliningrad's
commercial transit," M. Adomėnas told LRT radio on the same Saturday.
The Russians were informed that a ban on the transport of
steel and other ferrous metals had come into force on Saturday, followed by a
ban on the transport of cement, alcohol, coal and oil, a total of about 50
percent of goods in transit.
Russian officials, calling it the blockade of Kaliningrad,
began to throw threats against Lithuania.
Andrei Klimov, head of the commission of the Russian
Federation's Council for the Defense of Russia's State Sovereignty, said that
if the situation did not change, Moscow would have "free
hands" to resolve the situation by any means. Representative of the
Russian Foreign Minister Maria Zakharova assured that "there will be
consequences" and the response will not be diplomatic but practical.
It was placed on the table
"On March 14,
sanctions were adopted, all postponements were public, everything was clear,
who would drive, who would not, it was still on the table, "G. Landsbergis
told reporters after the joint meeting of the Seimas Foreign Affairs and
National Security and Defense Committees on Wednesday.
But if everything, as the minister says, was put on the
table, who needed further EC clarification? Which, as can be seen from M.
Adomėnas' comment to LRT radio, has not been received on Saturday.
On Thursday, questions increased after the influential
Politico quoted EC spokesman Eric Mamer as saying that additional guidelines
would be provided to Lithuanian authorities and that Lithuania should further
inspect goods traveling to Kaliningrad to avoid attempts to circumvent
sanctions but ensure free transit.
Politico's Brussels Playbook newsletter quoted two unnamed
officials as saying the new guidelines would make it clear that Lithuanian
customs officials should step up inspections but let through transported metals if
they were destined for the Russian domestic market. The publication writes that
there are contradictions between the statements of the Lithuanian Prime
Minister and the EC spokesperson.
The question of whether Brussels is turning back and telling
Lithuania to withdraw is answered in the negative.
Politico interlocutors say this is not the case, as the
sanctions were never intended to block Kaliningrad, "they are intended to
allow the EU to carry out additional inspections".
On Thursday, Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė explained that
there is no contradiction here - that inspections are necessary in order to
administer the application of sanctions.
At the time, the full statement of the EC representative E.
Mamer on Twitter reads: “Lithuania is implementing the EU restrictive measures
imposed by the Council on Russia unanimously. Secondly, it is not, of course, a
'blockade'. We have always said that the supply of essential goods to
Kaliningrad remains unhindered. Sanctions for certain Russian exports (steel
products, construction materials) are now in place (after short transition
periods). This means that Lithuania must perform additional road and rail
transit checks through the EU. Of course, these checks are targeted,
proportionate and effective. They will be designed to prevent attempts to circumvent
sanctions while ensuring free transit. We are cooperating closely with the
Lithuanian authorities and will provide additional guidance."
The price will not be the only Russian response
Klaudijus Maniokas, the Chairman of the Board of the European
Social, Legal and Economic Projects, who drew attention to the Politico
article, asked on Facebook who was lying - the Lithuanian Minister of Foreign
Affairs or the EC.
"I believe that the Lithuanian representatives have
consulted with the Commission, but I do not think they have received a very
clear answer. "I know from my own experience that expecting unambiguous
explanations from the Commission is the same as looking for Hepatica in the
winter," he writes.
K. Maniokas emphasized that he hoped that without great
efforts Lithuania would not have received an exception, but an interpretation
to maintain the status quo, which is beneficial for us.
“It’s been 29 years since those famous 1993 rules.
Lithuanian rulers chose the path of the expected escalation, exhibiting the
weakness of cargo transit regulation.
It was necessary to provide for the EC to be able to change
its position, and serious written guarantees of support were needed on such an
important issue. Where are they?” - He asks.
According to K. Maniokas, the price for such an
irresponsible policy will be not only Russia's response, but first and foremost
Lithuania's growing isolation in the Western camp.
"I will remind you that not only the EU, nor any
country in the world has followed Lithuania's example in terms of Taiwan's
representation. No EU country has sent home a Russian ambassador, as Lithuania did.
When no one is following you, it's not leadership, it's jumping out, it's
isolation, it's stupidity. With consequences for Lithuanian security, such as
the issue of the German brigade. I believe that Lithuanian leaders and
politicians will have a cold and common sense to manage the situation. But
obviously, this is not the first time we have climbed on the same rake. To
prevent this from happening again, change is needed, first and foremost, in
terms of staffing,” - he said.
A few days ago, K. Maniokas pointed out that despite the
current form of regulation of Kaliningrad cargo transit, it has always been
clear that that transit is not the same Russian cargo transportation as in
other EU countries, because it takes place from one part of Russia to another.
Through another sovereign state.
"When considering EU
sanctions, Lithuania had to pay attention to this, anticipate possible
consequences and propose possible solutions. Has that been done? And again -
maybe someone could explain? You really don’t need to panic, but you want to
understand if the people in charge understand what they’re doing.
Now everyone is under the guise of EU rules and enforcing
them, they pretend to have not created those rules themselves,” - he wrote.
Karoblis: We have expressed risks in the EC
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Raimundas Karoblis
replied that the question was not simple, but asked here whether Lithuania
should have defended Russia and its Kaliningrad region in the EU discussions on
EU sanctions.
"Yes, in theory we
could loudly demand an exemption for Kaliningrad transit. But that would
certainly be absolutely against our consistent position on support for Ukraine
and pressure on Russia. And not in our interests and not in accordance with our
values. Have we consulted the EC? Yes, constantly. Even expressing potential
risks. Both in writing and in bilateral meetings, as well as at expert and
ambassador and vice minister levels. "We have come to the same conclusion:
sanctions must be applied in accordance with EU regulations," he
emphasized.
The Deputy Minister explained that it was necessary to
choose between a bad and a very bad option.
"If we had chosen the other option (exception), we
would have looked similar to one EU member state" Here are the values. But
also about interests." "This challenge must be managed throughout Europe
and beyond," said Karoblis.
Decided not to explain anything
So what explanations did Lithuania receive from the EC and
how was it decided to deal with the issue of Kaliningrad transit?
Asked how it was clarified whether the sanctions adopted by
the EU also apply to transit, Gabrielė Vasiliauskaitė, a spokeswoman
for the Minister of Transport and Communications Marius Skuodis, suggested
asking the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), who decided not to answer any
questions.
The Delfi asked Ministry of Foreign Affairs what reasons the
EC had given in its reply to Lithuania, stating that the sanctions for transit
were valid, or that the Commission had been contacted again after the
implementation of the sanctions, but the Ministry chose not to respond to them.
Instead, Delfi was assured that "land transit is not suspended or blocked,
and the transit of unsanctioned goods continues," and that Lithuania has
not imposed individual restrictions.
"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not comment on
the decisions of other countries that may or may not occur in the future,"
the ministry said when asked what steps, not just languages, Russia could take
in retaliation and what scenarios were being prepared.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also did not go to clarifications
on the wording of the restrictions on the movement of goods are contained in
the sanctions adopted by the EU in mid-March.
As politicians reiterated that Lithuania was complying with
the sanctions imposed by the EU, but without providing additional explanations,
various marginalists, and not only on Facebook, began to share doubts as to
whether the adopted sanctions actually banned Russia from transporting goods to
its market.
Indeed, in a document adopted on 15 March, EU countries
agreed that, in addition to a ban on imports and purchases, "the transport
of iron and steel (ferrous metals) products if they originate in Russia or are
exported from Russia to any other country" is prohibited.
Although there was no more specific explanation in this
document on how to deal with Kaliningrad transit, on 8 April it was established
that any road transport company established in Russia was prohibited from
transporting goods by road within the EU, including transit.
However, there is an exception for mail and it is stated
that the exemption also applies to goods in transit through the EU between the Kaliningrad region and
Russia, but "unless otherwise prohibited by this Regulation".
Maybe he could have been better informed
The question of why a communication strategy has not been
developed, given the knowledge that sanctions will be in place since mid-March,
and the implications of Russia's response, has also remained open.
Tomas Janeliūnas, a professor at the Institute of
International Relations and Political Science of Vilnius University (VU TSPMI),
called the situation another communication crisis on Wednesday in the news
radio show "Question of the Day". By the way, he pointed out that it
was not only Russia that reacted to this storm - there were also signs of
concern from our partners in the West.
"We were not able to react in time and we are trying to
put out some kind of fire again," T. Janeliūnas stated.
European Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius said he had no
doubt that Russia had planned its stormy reaction in advance.
"What I don't like most is that we haven't had that
line of communication with us in the past, and perhaps with the
Commission," he said.
Mr Landsbergis told reporters on Thursday that the authorities
"could have been better informing" in response to the situation."
Lithuania's foreign policy is all the same. We are not delving
into it, we are making a big mistake (as with China). Then there is a scandal.
We are running to our mother, the European Commission, asking to defend us.
When will we release the fools from power?
European Commission is protecting
itself. If the Russians will escalate in court and win, the European Commission will tell: “Oops, this is all Lithuania’s fault. We
said only temporarily stop the trains and make sure nothing illegal is hidden
in the loads of metal. Stupid Lithuanians blocked the transit instead”. Should we always be stupid?
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą