Kęstutis Girnius. Has NATO strengthened, has Grybauskaitė saved the alliance?

He added that because of the gas deal with Moscow, this country has become a Russian prisoner, is fully under Russian control. According to the president, "we are paying billions of dollars to protect you, but you are paying billions of dollars to Russia …"

A brief discussion on NATO's financial burden during the unplanned summit suggested that if the other allies do not increase NATO spending, the United States will follow their own path. Some of his remarks were interpreted as a threat for the United States to leave the alliance

. There is no fear that Short, as at the G-7 meeting, will sign the final declaration. The President of the United States not only signed the document, but began to explain that NATO is now a united organization than ever before in its history, that the mood of the chiefs of state to the unexpected meeting was wonderful. It goes without saying that all this is his merit.

It is undeniable that the insistence of the Short Terms has played an important role in encouraging NATO members to increase their defense spending. Former United States presidents and defense secretaries have also criticized the underfunding of European defense countries, but they have done so in a more diplomatic and non-influential manner.

A brief chameleon in this regard did it. Few supporters can point out that the United States has paid more attention to European defense, backed arms deliveries to Ukraine, strengthened economic sanctions against Russia and took action against the United States. Other adverse decisions for Moscow, although he refused to deploy his troops in the Baltic countries. Patriot. The final declaration provides for a significant strengthening of NATO forces

One has to wonder if NATO has intensified or weakened lately. It is hard to imagine that the shortcuts, the humiliation of other members, especially from Germany, are without trace. Recall that the United States, having withdrawn from the agreement with Iran and threatening to punish Iranian and European companies that are trading in Iran, said that Europe could not go down and allow the United States to become a global economic policeman. "Do we want to be vbadals who obey the instructions of the United States, who are trapped in their pants?"

I have no doubt that no European leader thinks like that. Brief statement that NATO countries were expected to incur significant increases in defense spending, perhaps up to 4%. GDP, were soon reacted by French President E. Macron and Italian Prime Minister G. Conte. Both stressed that commitments prior to 2024 remain valid. 2% GDP, no new agreements.

Germany may not be able to say as much, because of a sharp increase in discontent, even outrage at a brief policy. Foreign Minister Hayek Maas said "we are not prisoners – neither Russia nor the United States."

The latest survey of the German population shows that 42% Approve the withdrawal of US troops from Germany, 37%. would like them to stay 21 percent. do not have a clear view. According to the same survey, only 15 percent of respondents agree with the Chancellor's opinion that by 2024, military spending needs to be increased to 2% of GDP, 36% say the country already spends too much on its military forces, 21%. do not have strong opinion. And it was before the recent short-term attacks

The new Spanish Prime Minister, Mr Sanchez, received a poll from his deputies when he said that his country would increase defense spending by 0.9% . up to about 2%

How is Lithuania's position in this precarious summit of NATO?

The president's advisor, his favorite journalists and enthusiastic social media, said the president played a particularly important role in calming the pbadions and reconciling the court and Merkel.

First of all, it should be noted that at the beginning of the meeting, after the first attacks on Merkel, the President stated that she was in agreement with the short circle . criticizing Germany for the development of the Nord Stream pipeline and the lack of funding for the defense. The President stressed that Lithuania's position on these issues has been long established. That is true, but is it necessary to repeat it publicly and to remain brief when it attacks one of the main Allies of Lithuania who still commands a deployed NATO battalion in Lithuania?

Grybauskaitė Approval A blow to me reminded me of a man who sabotaged the dead. In this context, she had to break her tongue and keep quiet.

The next day, she praised the brief "positive aggression" attacking the Allies for defense funding, as she acted. Grybauskaitė's mediation was not mentioned by independent sources and international media, except for the English edition of the German magazine Spiegel, which states that Grybauskaitė was the first to speak after the barrage, which, as a karate specialist, agreed to take action. Three short sentences, no words on their impact.

The Presidency has posted a video on its website where Grybauskaitė is discussing with Short and Macron. Macron sincerely thanks her for her "very good and positive" statement. The record shows how the president rushes to the Brief, takes his hand, begins to praise, thanks to the "pressure", explains that Lithuania already spends 2% in defense. Listening briefly, turning a note to a group of people (I did not understand what he said), and going off. The whole conversation lasts 20 seconds. It is true that Short said "a great job", but he says it to everyone.

The president obviously tries to please briefly, I would say that he is defeating. She also behaved at a meeting of the Baltic President with the Brief White House.

It will not be easy for him to overcome the innate favor of the United States, which is a country that guarantees our security. But it should not try to be short to the detriment of the EU countries, especially Germany.