Political commentator Marius Laurinavičius and political analyst Linas Kojala, head of the Centre for East European Studies, discussed Russia's actions in Ukraine in the „New Day“ programme on „Lietuvos rytas“ TV.
An attempt to redraw the map of Europe
Political commentator Mijus Laurinavičius considered that the Russian President's speech on Monday had received too much attention. But, according to him, Putin's speech was „neither new nor something that could not have been expected“.
„You could say that some details, that suddenly Ukraine seemed to Putin to be created by Lenin, some other nonsense was said. So, you could say that those details mean something, but in reality, the general narrative of Putin, both about Ukraine, that it is not a state and he does not recognise any sovereignty over it, and concerning the West in general, that Russia is cornered here, that NATO is attacking it, we have heard all that.
The language itself, in my view, is intended to justify the actions that Russia has taken before its domestic audience. Therefore, it does not have any strategic significance, in my opinion, and I think it is being given too much attention,“ said Mr Laurinavičius.
According to the expert, Putin „likes to be a history teacher“, but there is no reason to believe that this speech is just a PR stunt.
For his part, Mr Kojala described the Russian leader's announcement as „a long speech with a very short message“.
„The rest of the speech was very much in line with a very long article that Putin wrote last summer about his understanding of Ukraine's history and development. And now it is just a verbal one, the same narrative is being continued in a very targeted way by Lavrov, emphasising that supposedly the Maidan in 2014 created the possibility of a coup d'état, and that this new government does not represent a large part of the population of Ukraine, and that here Russia is becoming an actor that is addressing this problem of non-representativeness.
One could probably come up with many different stories to justify the basic fact that the political map of Europe has been redrawn once again by Russia, and the risk of military escalation remains very high to this day,“ stressed the political scientist.
Putin's past must also be searched for its roots
According to Kojala, Russia's aggressive mentality is due to the fact that its foreign policy objectives are not achievable by other means.
„Cooperation, economic and cultural ties with neighbouring countries do not, in the Kremlin's view, create the kind of links that would satisfy the objectives of the Kremlin's political system. Hence, aggressive forms of action remain. It is probably not for nothing that yesterday's Russian Security Council included representatives officials, who are perhaps already a little confused as to which territories in the surrounding region are annexed, occupied, and recognised as independent states because there are many of them. This is simply a pattern that has been applied not for the first time and reflects Russia's own weaknesses“, the expert noted.
Laurinavičius would look for the roots of the Russian mentality in the past of Putin and the regime as a whole.
„We have to remember that this is a KGB-based regime, and this is their mindset. The phrase that the collapse of the USSR was a catastrophe often comes to mind, and this is their Soviet nostalgia or the idea that the Soviet state, made up of a bunch of occupied countries, was somehow a good thing. On the other hand, the hostility towards the West, primarily the USA, is so imprinted on the brains of people with a KGBist past that it cannot, in principle, be removed. All of this corresponds precisely to the KGBist nature of the regime, both of Putin himself and of the regime“, the political commentator explained.
Kojala added that Lithuania has also heard similar messages to those currently being heard in Ukraine.
„If we recall the statement that at the time of the collapse of the USSR, Lithuania had 3.5 million inhabitants, and now there are 1.5 million left, with a much thicker colouring, the message that the Baltic States are failed states, that they are not full members of NATO, of the EU, has also been sent out in a targeted way. <...> Perhaps they are not as influential and effective for various reasons. Now we are hearing the same narrative with regard to Ukraine, and it is not new.
In Putin's speech yesterday, probably half of the time was spent on the humiliation of Ukraine, on open mockery, on doubts about the statehood of that country, about its ability to take independent decisions. In this derogatory way, an attempt is being made to give the impression that Russia is not acting aggressively but is becoming a rescuer,“ the political analyst explained.
What next?
According to Laurinavičius, Monday's events have not changed the situation, and there are still two scenarios.
„One is that Putin or the regime will be satisfied with this for the time being, and it could be part of their exit strategy. But the other scenario is that these are successive steps towards that new, big offensive because we cannot talk about any new war. The war in Ukraine has been going on for eight years now, but we can talk about a new major offensive on the Russian side.
Judging by the mistake made by the Putin regime, we can expect less and less rational solutions from Russia, even on their side“, said the political commentator.
Kojala does not think that the situation will change for the better either.
„On the contrary, the situation has certainly worsened in recent days, not only because of the recognition of pseudo-republics but also because the overall assessment of the number of assassinations allegedly committed by Russia in Ukraine has significantly increased,“ he said.
According to the political analyst, what is needed now is a complex set of measures from Western countries.
„Attention should be paid to NATO's deterrence in our region because not only the recognition of the pseudo-republics was yesterday's event, but also the confirmation that Russian troops will remain in Belarus – which means that the situation of the NATO countries on the eastern flank is challenging. Another factor is the continued unity of the West. Here we have seen more or less a positive posture, and this must be maintained, with a straightforward narrative of what is going on, without creating the conditions for Russian disinformation.
