10 May 2010
Ladies and
Gentlemen, hosts and guests of the Conference,
I am pleased to welcome all of you to the
Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania. It is a great privilege for us that the
European Peoples Party, representing the most powerful centre right force in
Europe, has chosen our country to host its Political Assembly and the Centre
for European Studies is organising a Conference on the future of the Baltic
States in Vilnius. It is remarkable and symbolic that we are meeting in the
March 11 Hall where the independence of Lithuania was restored 20 years ago.
It may sound
like a paradox but two decades ago a number of issues related to the future of
our state and the entire Europe seemed simpler and clearer. While todays
reality, though manifesting unquestionable and meaningful progress achieved,
brings new challenges and new problems.
Certainly, Lithuanias membership of the political and
economic area of the European Union is beyond question today. I am convinced
that a circle of friends and the like-minded assembled in this Conference and
the ideas they will share will offer another opportunity for EU leaders to
learn about the Baltic experience of integration into the Euro-Atlantic
security structures and a long-term Baltic security policy and economic
perspective. Undoubtedly, a deeper look into this experience would allow
European leaders to better recognise the existential security dilemmas faced by
the Baltic States and their motives for choosing particular directions of
foreign and security policy too.
We notice that our European partners are
sometimes rather reserved and hesitant about the threats and challenges we
identify, especially within the foreign and security policy. Let us not be
afraid to admit that the Baltic States sometimes have a somewhat different
perception of security compared to the rest of the EU. Today it is crucial to
understand the reasons which determine the differences and the answer may
probably rest, among other things, on philosophy.
As the Cold War ended, the perception of
international relations characteristic of the political culture of Immanuel
Kant emerged, according to which, Europe is now living in eternal peace and the
problems of security we face must be solved with the help of the principle of
multilateralism, mutual respect, and interdependence. Instead of applying a
punishment and sanction policy vis-à-vis certain geopolitical actors
whose behaviour is often in strong conflict with European standards, the EU
seeks to integrate those actors, bind them, or convince them to change their
behaviour.
Whereas Lithuania and other Baltic states
live according to the political culture of Thomas Hobbes where relations with
countries that violate European standards are seen in the light of competition
and the balance of power. This could probably explain a slight miscommunication
between the EU, which is mostly preoccupied with climate change, settlement of
humanitarian crises in various countries of the world, or sustainable economic
growth, and the Baltic States, which are still seeking to break free from
energy isolation and become fully-fledged members of the EU and especially
NATO.
This reflects the experience and the
present of our states. Energy security is the most vulnerable and probably a
sore point with Lithuania since today we are evidently affected by energy and
infrastructural isolation. We find ourselves in a paradoxical situation where
Lithuania being an active member of the EU and NATO continues to use Soviet
type railways and purchase gas and oil from the sole supplier. Therefore, the
common EU energy policy is the apparent and urgent priority for Lithuania and
the other Baltic States.
The relations with the neighbouring
countries that are not willing to follow European standards constitute another
issue. Unfortunately, we must acknowledge that for two decades after the end of
the Cold War the EU has failed to offer a model of relations to Russia that
would promote its political and economic progress under the scenario of
accepting European rules.
We cannot consider the situation either
normal or fair where in practice Russian energy monopolies can freely invest in
the EU market while Russia has imposed firm restrictions on foreign direct
investments in the strategic sectors of its economy. This makes us wonder
whether the EU has any effective tools vis-à-vis Russia or why a
dialogue between the EU and Russia is not developed according to European
rules. Evidently, Russias economic modernisation should be implemented in
parallel with political reforms. Therefore, in Lithuanias view, EU Russia
relations should be based on the principle of legal reciprocity whereby Russia
would be compelled to abide by European rules, at least in the areas where it
seeks integrity with the EU.
We face a number of issues and some of
them are constantly raised at similar meetings. It means that we need to talk,
share our ideas and look for solutions. I hope that the solutions we find as
well as the ideas we share will not only help to address the problems but will
also contribute to our political and economic progress in the coming two
decades and beyond.
I wish it to come true and I believe it
will. On this note I welcome all the guests of the Conference once again and I
wish you lively interaction, rewarding discussions, and interesting proposals
on how to move on.
