The Lawfare Podcast: NATO’s Eastern Flank—The View from Lithuania

Date: October 29, 2025
Host: Katyna Schmatyna (Lawfare Institute)
Guests: Gabrielius Landsbergis (Former Lithuanian Minister of Foreign Affairs), Vitus Yurkonis (Assoc. Prof. at University of Vilnius)

Overview

This episode focuses on Lithuania's security perspective as both a NATO and EU member state bordering Russia and Belarus. With the ongoing Russian war in Ukraine, the conversation explores Lithuania's sense of vulnerability, its policy and societal shifts since 2022, the tactics and aims of Kremlin aggression, the broader strategic landscape—including US/NATO commitment—and deep reflections on Lithuania’s history of resistance and quest for sovereignty.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Current Security Atmosphere in Lithuania

[02:03–07:22]

• Heightened Tension & Resilience:
  • Lithuania is on high alert due to Russia’s aggression toward Ukraine and hybrid provocations like airspace violations, cyber attacks, and disinformation campaigns.
  • Societal resilience has increased, inspired by Ukraine’s ability to defend itself against Russia despite the odds.
• Major Societal Response:
  • Immediate and widespread Lithuanian solidarity with Ukraine—hosting refugees, aiding civic initiatives (notably Blue Yellow), donating for military and humanitarian support.
  • Despite waves of psychological attacks, Lithuanian society remains vigilant, ready to respond, and avoids panic.
• Hybrid Threats:
  • Kremlin and Belarusian tactics include sowing division, fanning anti-migrant and anti-liberal sentiment.
  • Continuous “divide and rule” initiatives through information warfare and instrumentalized migration.

“We are caught in the, in a perfect storm of aggressive Russia and United States that's reconfiguring its role in, in the world. And unfortunately we are, you know, we are at the front line.”

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [01:04]

2. Policy Shifts After Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine

[07:22–10:39]

• Defense Spending:
  • Lithuania raised defense spending from ~2% to 5% of GDP.
• Shifts in Governance:
  • Initial unity and speed of policymaking have slowed; polarization grows as the stress has somewhat subsided.
  • Concern that current stability could lead to complacency, risking under-preparedness.
• Military and Asymmetric Response:
  • Focus on lessons from Ukraine, including anti-drone defenses and readiness for continued escalation from Russia.

“Nor in the military, in political sphere or anywhere could be saying that or should be saying that, well, tomorrow will be safer. Unfortunately, most of the people say something different, that, well, Putin, most likely, he's going to escalate.”

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [09:35]

3. Russia’s Messaging and Potential for Baltic Escalation

[11:01–16:48]

• Russian Testing of Boundaries:
  • Kremlin signal sending via drone incursions and provocations is aimed as much at Western resolve as at immediate targets.
  • If the West responds weakly or ambiguously, Moscow sees it as an invitation to further aggression.
  • Key Policy Question: How to impose meaningful costs on Russia for escalating hybrid attacks?
• Putin’s Calculus:
  • Feeling pressure due to Ukraine’s long-range strikes, but still banking on Western/Ukrainian fatigue.
  • Probable aim of escalating hybrid attacks: to force Western capitals to reconsider support for Ukraine.
• The Dangers of Non-Escalation:
  • Hesitance to respond can embolden the Kremlin, as lack of a firm Western reaction signals weakness.

“If we choose to kind of, let's not escalate, you know, by not saying the truth, I think that this certainly has the opposite effect, which is encouraging Kremlin to actually be more aggressive.”

—Vitus Yurkonis [13:00]

“This invites further escalation. For Putin, it is a sign of weakness... There are ways how to send a message without shooting a rocket at Russian city. And I think that way West could manage escalation quite well.”

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [15:30]

4. Lithuania’s Experience with Hybrid Attacks & Energy Independence

[16:48–21:31]

• Spectrum of Attacks:
  • From cable sabotage in the Baltic Sea to cyberattacks and disinformation—all longstanding Kremlin tactics, not unique to the Ukraine war era.
  • Previous energy blackmail by Russia spurred Lithuania to make the hard (and costly) decision to end dependence on Russian energy.
• Adaptation:
  • Efforts to bolster resilience: investing in cybersecurity, regional cooperation, energy independence.
  • Historic sacrifices were justified as essential for sovereignty, despite immediate costs.

“Lithuania was among the very first who decided that we might face short term costs…just to make sure that we are not becoming victims of that kind of blackmail. And now we are not in this energy circle of BRELL like as of this year…some politicians were saying, that was our last battle regarding our independence.”

—Vitus Yurkonis [19:20]

5. NATO, the US, and Alliance Dynamics (in the Trump Era)

[21:31–26:32]

• Strategic Ambiguity:
  • Under the second Trump administration, the US stance on European defense has grown less clear, raising concerns in Lithuania and elsewhere.
  • Europe’s commitment to take more responsibility has been stated, but readiness is uncertain (“Europe would be ready to defend itself by 2030”—potential window for Putin).
• US Policy Shifts:
  • Notable budget cuts such as cancellation of the Baltic Security Initiative.
  • Anticipation (and anxiety) over the US Force Posture Review, with fears of reduced troop presence in the Baltics.
• Implications for the Region:
  • Diminishing American support may be read in Moscow as an invitation to test NATO’s red lines.

“We ended a time of strategic clarity when it comes to US commitment. And we've entered a stage…we could potentially call ambiguity.”

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [22:15]

"I'm still kind of believing that we are caught in a perfect storm of aggressive Russia and United States that's reconfiguring its role in the world. And unfortunately, we are, you know, we are at the front line."

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [26:27]

6. Prospects for Peace: Negotiating with Russia

[30:27–44:12]

• Distrust in Negotiations:
  • Historical precedent and current realities: deep skepticism about Kremlin intentions.
  • ‘Weaponized victimization’—Russia’s narrative of being a perpetual victim is intentionally manipulative.
• Effective Signals:
  • To enter negotiations from a position of strength, the West must maintain and intensify sanctions, increase support for Ukraine, and enforce consequences for transgressions.
• Lithuanian Experience:
  • Long history adapts the lesson: dialogue or concessions absent tangible leverage only encourage Kremlin adventurism.
  • Negotiations may be needed, but only from a demonstrably strong and united front.

“Clearly Kremlin doesn't understand anything else but power and that needs to be our response…we don't have the luxury to actually think that…we'll talk to him…No, he wouldn't.”

—Vitus Yurkonis [41:58]

“I call this weaponized victimization…an empire that was first to begin the wars…suddenly [becomes] the biggest victim and we all tend to forget.… The blame is squarely in Russia's court and… they will lose the argument and the war.”

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [38:00]

7. Lithuania's Fight for Sovereignty: Lessons from History

[44:12–52:55]

• Legacy of Resistance:
  • After Soviet and Nazi occupations, Lithuania’s historical memory is defined by sacrifice, resilience, and the necessity for self-assertion.
  • The struggle for NATO and EU membership was driven by both historic trauma and a determination to avoid being left outside European integration.
• Moving Quickly for Security:
  • Lithuania declared independence as soon as feasible, understanding that delays could result in being left out of Western alliances.
  • Western support was not a given; in fact, leaders like France and Germany initially urged caution.
• Pride and Caution:
  • Lithuania was the first Soviet-occupied republic to re-declare independence, setting an example for others.
  • The readiness to defend hard-won independence—by arms if necessary—remains rooted in national consciousness.

“There's a strong focus on resilience, on fighting even at odds, and a general understanding that freedom is not for free, that you need to fight it. And sometimes it means sacrifices.”

—Vitus Yurkonis [46:12]

“We want to be free. We are free people. We elected a parliament that is democratic and recognized, and we declared our independence. And now it's up to the West to make their move.”

—Gabrielius Landsbergis [51:10]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “We are caught in the perfect storm of aggressive Russia and United States that's reconfiguring its role in the world. And unfortunately, we are…at the front line.”
  —Gabrielius Landsbergis [01:04 & 26:27]
• “The blame is squarely in Russia's court and...they will lose the argument and the war.”
  —Gabrielius Landsbergis [38:00]
• “Freedom is not for free, that you need to fight it. And sometimes it means sacrifices.”
  —Vitus Yurkonis [46:12]
• “We cannot, we don't have the luxury to actually think that…we'll talk to him, we'll open his eyes and like he will understand. No, he wouldn't for multiple reasons. And therefore basically at the moment the only answer is help Ukraine and prepare for the worst case scenario to defend yourself.”
  —Vitus Yurkonis [41:58]
• “I call this weaponized victimization...”
  —Gabrielius Landsbergis [38:00]

Important Segment Timestamps

• Setting the scene: Lithuanian security after Russia’s 2022 escalation [02:03–07:22]
• Policy & military changes in Lithuania [07:22–10:39]
• Russia’s hybrid operations and escalation risks [11:01–16:48]
• Lithuania’s adaptation: Energy, cyber, info war [16:48–21:31]
• NATO/US strategic ambiguity post-2024 [21:31–26:32]
• Negotiating with Russia: Trust, victimization, and lessons for peace talks [30:27–44:12]
• Lithuania’s historic path to sovereignty and NATO/EU [44:12–52:55]

Summary

This episode delivers a granular, candid assessment of Lithuania’s position on NATO’s eastern flank and the persistent realities of Russian aggression, past and present. Both guests stress Lithuania’s readiness to respond—not just militarily, but with societal resilience—while expressing clear-eyed skepticism about Russian intentions or peace prospects absent Western unity and strength. Their reflections on post-Soviet history and Lithuania’s path to independence provide crucial context—highlighting why 'never again' is more than a slogan in Vilnius, and why the Baltics, as frontline democracies, remain a bellwether for Western resolve.