The Baltic countries – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – are increasing their defense spending. Estonia already spends 2 percent of its GDP on defense – the NATO spending goal. Latvia and Lithuania plan to hit 2 percent in the coming years. The Cipher Brief’s Kaitlin Lavinder spoke with Lithuanian Ambassador to the U.S. Rolandas Kriščiūnas about why the region is emphasizing defense and what his country is doing to bolster security.
The Cipher Brief: IHS Markit recently came out with its annual defense spending report, and it showed that the Baltics is the fastest growing region, having doubled defense spending from 2014-2016. Why is there this rapid increase?
Ambassador Rolandas Kriščiūnas: There is no single reason, but one major driver is that during the financial crisis, our financing of defense went down. As NATO members, we always had the goal to reach 2 percent of GDP on defense spending, and of course after the crisis, which Lithuania coped with very successfully, our economy started to grow. And we were able to come up with the financing to increase defense spending. So it’s not that it has happened in just the last year or two – [the initiative] happened much earlier and it always was our aim to reach 2 percent.
In just three years, our expenditures doubled. And now we have parliament’s approval to reach 2 percent by 2018 – so next year we will be at 2 percent. The Minister of Defense has even said that should not be the goal in and of itself, so it could be above 2 percent.
The key is that it’s our obligation to NATO, which we’ve always seen not as a client – we’re all in it together, we’re all owners of NATO. Everyone, including Lithuania, should contribute. You cannot demand from others if you are not doing it yourself. So I would say that’s the key reason for the increase in our defense spending.
The other thing is we see the situation security-wise is changing in the region, and unfortunately not for the better. And we always remember that the NATO agreement is not just about Article 5, which claims that one should come to the assistance of a NATO member under attack, but it’s also about Article 3, which states that the state itself should do everything it can to defend. So that’s why we are building resilience on our own. Financing is just one of things we have done.
TCB: Is it inaccurate then to say that there was a substantial spike in defense spending in 2014 due to Russia’s incursions in Crimea?
RK: Yes. Of course that was one of the reasons, but it’s not the single reason, because 2 percent was always our aim. And whenever we were able to find the resources, which was very difficult to do back in 2009, when we saw the budget deficit increase up to 10 percent and we had to implement harsh reforms to cut the expenditures everywhere across the board, we started to do it.
TCB: Can you expand upon some of the more recent external threats that have caused the Baltic countries to increase defense spending quickly (beyond Russia)?
RK: Of course there are other reasons, but the major reason is the security situation in the region, as I said, and that is related to an aggressive Russia.
But then of course we never saw NATO as just a client state, which we use while others contribute. We were always part of NATO activities. So when the U.S. invited NATO members to help them in Afghanistan, for example, Lithuania had the administrative task in one of the provinces. So that was quite a big step for Lithuania to take. We were on our own – not a partner or junior partner – we were on our own responsible for the administration of Ghor province. We also went to develop infrastructure there, attract financing to build schools and roads, and of course to provide security to this province.
Then if there is a need for instructors, we are always ready to make our contribution, for example in Iraq. So that’s also where this defense financing is going, not just for our own equipment we buy, creating infrastructure, training ranges, shooting ranges, and so on, but it’s also the source for our international participation with the NATO partners.
TCB: It’s hard to speculate on what the new U.S. Administration’s policy will be toward NATO and NATO allies, but, from the comments that President-elect Trump has made about the 2 percent defense spending goal, could that actually be seen as a positive – that he’s continuing the Obama and Bush policy of demanding that European allies take responsibility for their own defense, which will, in aggregate, strengthen NATO?
RK: That’s how we take it in Lithuania. We never doubted the commitment of any of the NATO members, including the U.S.
Of course, we were always aiming for 2 percent and as the new American President steps into office and I imagine demands that we all need to contribute 2 percent, I could not agree more. If everyone contributes 2 percent, it will make NATO stronger, not weaker. And of course, I think every member in NATO should be interested in a stronger NATO.
TCB: You mentioned earlier specific capabilities that Lithuania is building upon for defense. Can you expand on that and discuss the reinstatement of mandatory military service?
RK: Financing is just one side of things. Since 2014, we have established, for example, our national rapid reaction force, which can react to any hybrid scenario within 24 hours.
We also are improving communication and cooperation between police, border patrols, and the military in peaceful times, because sometimes it’s not obvious.
Also, we are talking with Latvians and Estonians on military movement across the border to help each other. It seems like it’s only natural, but sometimes it’s not. That also raises some questions on what we need to do to smooth procedures for operating across borders.
We also reintroduced conscription. Earlier, we had a reform that all our defense would be based on a professional army. So we reintroduced conscription with a very clear purpose to build the reserve, to be able to rely on bigger forces, in the scenario of a threat from outside. And we are very happy with what we have seen. Now, we take around 3,000 conscripts every year to educate them, train them, and put them into the reserves. What we have seen is that 20 percent of those end up in the professional army – so one in five decide “oh, I would like to make a living out of it.” So it also helps us build the professional army faster.
Now there are even discussions at a very preliminary stage about general conscription…everyone doing some service. But it’s more of an idea at the moment.
We are also looking to modernize our army. We spend almost one-third of our defense budget on equipment. One of the projects we are currently discussing is air defense systems, mid-range air defense systems, which also makes sense to discuss with our neighbors – Latvia and Estonia – because when you acquire something like that, you need to cooperate. There are a lot of areas where you get efficiency if you cooperate more. And purchasing equipment together, that’s one of those things which could get you efficiencies.
Another important sector is energy. Just three years ago we were fully reliant on Russian supplies, and that’s why we were also paying the price Russia was asking for gas because we had no alternative; we were very vulnerable. If Russia closed the pipeline, it would have been the sole source of gas for us, but now we have an energy terminal for gas to come by sea. Last year was the first year ever when most of the gas for our consumption came from Norway – 60 percent. It used to be 100 percent Russian gas, now it’s 60 percent Norwegian gas.
TCB: Going back to NATO, Germany is leading a battalion in Lithuania as part of the Warsaw Summit’s commitment to deterrence vis-à-vis Russia. Can you give us a brief outlook on that?
RK: Lithuania expects NATO forces to start to arrive as early as next month. We always claimed there should be NATO forces in each of the Baltic states because we are part of NATO. How can you extend your NATO guarantees without any actual capacity to implement those guarantees?
But the key to all this is to not get to a situation where you will actually need to defend the Baltics. The key is to deter, to make sure nobody should doubt that once you cross the border of the Baltics you will be meeting British forces in Estonia, Canadians in Latvia, and Germans in Lithuania.
I think that’s very strong messaging that the Baltics are not just on their own and that the NATO guarantee to the Baltics is not just theoretical but also implementable. And that, I think, changes the calculations on the Russian side. It’s not, will I have 24 hours, will I have 30 hours before anyone will come to the aid of the Baltics? Now, no, you know your answer. You move in, you meet the battalions of NATO forces in the Baltics.
In the Baltics, we always say Russia only talks to others from the position of strength. When our allies were telling us that [positioning NATO forces] would possibly provoke Russia, it really gave us a smile to think a battalion of NATO forces in Lithuania could provoke Russia because they feel endangered. It’s nonsensical.
