How are the idiots running Lithuania wasting billions of euros from our taxes? Why do they need it? Think about it during the next elections.

 

“Recently, after the Seimas National Security and Defense Committee (NSGK) recommended that the Ministry of National Defense (KAM) postpone the purchase of Brazilian Embraer C-390 Millennium aircraft until a Lithuanian army division is formed, and after public outrage over such a purchase, the ministry, representatives of the ruling majority, and even the army are trying to argue for the necessity of this acquisition. What are those arguments - and are they convincing?

 

According to army representatives, the currently used Spartan aircraft are aging, and their operational capabilities will be exhausted in the next decade.

 

It is said that these aircraft will no longer be able to fly in the airspace of the European Union from 2030, and their use will have to be completely discontinued in 2036-2039.

 

“Therefore, it is necessary to make timely decisions to avoid a gap in air capabilities,” the military says.

 

It is also emphasized that tactical transport aircraft are currently the most lacking at the NATO level, so Lithuania’s decision to acquire new equipment directly contributes to strengthening the Alliance’s overall capabilities.

 

Is this argumentation sufficient?

 

Today, our security directly depends on how much longer Ukraine will hold out and how much we will be able to deter a potential adversary. Considering that we have limited funds for both defense and time for preparation, we should pay special attention to prioritizing acquisitions.

 

It is obvious that the main defense priorities are: training and arming an active reserve, air defense, installation of defensive lines, and modernization of the military, i.e. the development of capabilities for specialized unmanned systems capable of exerting an asymmetric effect on a more numerous adversary and their integration into the military.

 

However, it is what it is – our decision-makers have decided to base the deterrence strategy on the help of the allies. Therefore, the main expenses are directed to the creation of the necessary infrastructure to receive the allies and the establishment of a division, which, according to them, requires those unfortunate, already discussed, tanks.

 

And only time will tell which option will work out better – whether to invest in the creation and strengthening of our national capabilities, following the example of Finland, or to direct all funds and efforts to attract allies and hope that they will defend us.

 

As a person who has fought face to face with a real enemy in a real war, of course, I would first of all like to have the opportunities and means to defend myself, and not wait for mercy from the country.

 

I would like to proudly say, following the example of the Finns: “We strive to become not consumers of security, but creators of security.”

 

However, it seems that being only consumers of security is enough for many Lithuanians. The generals of the newly created division are wearing additional stars, tank sellers are calculating considerable commissions, and the construction sector is collecting profits from the military towns with schools and kindergartens being built in the forests to accommodate the families of the allies.

 

Everyone wins – Lithuania loses.

 

In the working group for the development of the “Drone Wall” project, we have calculated that for the price of one tank we are purchasing (about 50 million euros), it would be possible to create and equip one battalion of unmanned systems, which could effectively support an entire brigade for a whole month during the war.

 

In this context, the decision to purchase three transport aircraft for almost 800 million – the same amount as about 10 F-16 fighter jets – seems completely normal.

 

When you are not actually preparing to defend yourself, what difference does it make to spend those funds intended for defense? Well, let others continue to carry out air policing missions in Lithuania, because they need it more.

 

The only thing that is striking is that neither our Latvian neighbors nor the Estonians see the need for such purchases, because it is obvious that transport aircraft do not create any additional combat capability, let alone a deterrent effect.

 

We would also not like to hear that, for example, Estonia focuses most of its attention on the acquisition of ammunition - it has already concluded contracts worth 1.9 billion euros, and has additionally allocated another 1.6 billion euros for ammunition for long-range weapons.

 

Well, the Estonians are not only planning a defensive line, but are actually installing it, and they already have a center of competence for unmanned systems.

 

We, in the face of impending aggression, are planning the acquisition of transport aircraft and justify this by strengthening NATO capabilities, and we also add that no defense sector will suffer from this, there will be money for everything.

Unbelievable.”