We are the object of laughter of the whole world, before peace comes to our region: Are we in Lithuania striving to be “the most militaristic country in the world”?

 

"From the fall of Napoleon until the start of World War I or the Great War, there was relative peace between the major European powers, with only five wars between them, all of which, except for the Crimean War, were short. 

 

At the beginning of the 20th century, an arms race began, which contributed to the outbreak of World War I.

 

The Balkan countries had proportionally the largest armies. Montenegro, with a population of about 300,000 in 1909, could mobilize 30,000 to 40,000 soldiers, almost every man between the ages of 18 and 62. One Bulgarian general boasted that it was the most militaristic country in the world.

 

Perhaps President Gitanas Nausėda wants to boast in a similar way, saying last week that in order to create a division by 2030, "instead of 3.5 percent of GDP, 5 or 5.5 percent may be needed." 

 

The goddesses of war did not bless the most militaristic countries. During the First Balkan War In 1912, Bulgaria conquered a considerable amount of territory, but lost it a year later in the Second World War. During the First World War, more than a quarter of the country's population served in the 1,200,000-strong army, but in 1918 it was forced to capitulate and cede large areas of territory to the enemy.

 

Times are different. At the beginning of the last century, the most important duty of statesmen was to prepare for war. Warriors and armies were glorified, monuments and statues immortalized major victories, kings and princes constantly wore military uniforms, even during religious holiday processions. This tradition has only been partially abandoned. This year, on Armistice Day, King Charles III of England wore an admiral's uniform. Such a costume would be more suitable for a masquerade or Halloween party, but a king has the right to indulge his whims, no matter how stupid they may be. Uniforms are objects of love to bank clerk  Nausėda, whom we call Mr. President of Lithuania.

 

The size of the armed forces will remain relatively modest, so Lithuania is a “militaristic state” only in a figurative sense. But we are trying. A brochure “In case of crisis or war: how to behave” is distributed to all residents of Vilnius.

 

They teach how to prepare a departure basket and a first-aid kit, what food supplies to take care of in advance, etc. For some reason, I did not receive the brochure, so I did not read it all, but I am skeptical. When I was a small child, air raid drills were held in US schools, during which you had to hide under your desk or go down to the basement. It was not only for me difficult to take such drills seriously.

 

Now the duties of statesmen are different - you need to take more care of the well-being of citizens, properly manage the economy, or at least not create artificial brakes and prevent it from growing. At the beginning of his presidency, Nausėda talked a lot about creating a welfare state. Just hearing such talk gives the impression that the welfare state and poorer citizens are being sacrificed on the altar of division, because if 5.5 percent of GDP is allocated to defense, then crumbs will be left for social services.

 

Although the armies were enormous at the beginning of the 20th century, defense spending has been brought under control. UK defense spending increased from 2.5 percent of GDP in 1893 to 3.2 percent of GDP in 1913. In the same year, in Germany it was 3.5 percent of GDP, in the Austrian Empire it reached 2.8 percent of GDP, in France – 3.9 percent of GDP. Even Russia did not allocate 5 percent, being content with 4.6 percent of GDP.

 

Appetite grows while eating. In February, delfi.lt published a detailed article “How much is needed for Lithuania’s needs: after everything is done, the defense budget would exceed 3 percent.” So, this year, 3 percent GDP seemed to be enough, now it is being made clear that at least temporarily almost twice as much is needed. Perhaps it is believed that the new coalition, attacked from all sides because of Žemaitaitis, will not be able to withstand the pressure.

 

Lithuania's security will be determined by NATO. If Lithuania were left alone, it would make no difference whether we allocated 5 percent of GDP to defense annually or 10 percent. 15 percent would not be enough either. The acquisition price of the fifth-generation fighter F-22 "Raptor", designed to ensure air superiority, is high, often exceeding 150 million dollars per unit.

 

It is estimated that the operating cost of an F-22 "Raptor" is about 85,325 US dollars. The main maintenance costs of another fighter, the F-35, over four years amount to about 203 million dollars in civilian costs, and the "Raptor" is even higher. Lithuania would not be able to "digest" such costs, even less capable fighters would be too expensive.

 

Before the Great War, millions of socialists were committed to opposing aggressive nationalism and promoting international friendship, solidarity and cooperation.

 

There was no common opinion on national defence. When the war broke out, socialists supported their governments, did not oppose the hostilities, and allowed European socialism to politically collapse.

 

In the autumn of 2017, Paluckas argued that, once Lithuania reached 2% of GDP for defence next year, there would be no need to increase funding – the funds should be allocated to reducing social exclusion. This is what the social democrats should be doing. Events in Ukraine has changed the situation, and now the social democrats are determined to unconditionally support Nausėda’s proposals. Social democrat D. Šakalienė, considered the most realistic candidate to become the Minister of National Defense, says that the future government will provide for such financing for defense as will be agreed upon in the State Defense Council.

 

The Commander of the Armed Forces, that is, Nausėda, said that 5 percent is needed, "so when we gather in the State Defense Council <...> we will look for and find the money". So much for the principles of the Social Democrats. At least Šakalienė did not call for an increase in spending to 6 percent."