Okay, dear readers and subscribers, welcome to a exclusive interview with The New Conservative Party chairman of the Lithuanian homeland Union Party chairman, yeah, rightly
mentioned, newly elected chairman of a party, also the former defense minister, and now I'm deputy chair of national security Defense Committee at the premier Parliament, which is yes. So
talk about the homeland Union Party. Some people are a little familiar with Lithuania, if they read my book, they are. But how does it compare to, let's say, Republican Party, center right movement here in the United States? What similarities do the party share?
You know, the homeland Union came and it grow from our independence movement. So main routes are 35 years ago. So I call it geopolitical miracle when we, despite big influence by Moscow, we decided to be independent. And leadership of Professor situka Landsberg was like. He was great geopolitical chess player being brave, and it helped us not to escape from Soviet Union, to be the first to escape. So the roots of a party comes here. Also. We have linkage with the First Republic of Lithuania, interwar Lithuania, where Christian Democratic Party was very strong and we re establish itself in independence years and then linked itself and united with conservatives. Now we have the Honolulu union, Lithuanian Christian Democrats. It's like United Party and its umbrella party. It's outside central right party. We have more liberal conservative people and more conservative people. So election with, and I'm saying liberal conservatives were always dominating in the party, but now with my election, I would say with a shift to the to the right, to conservative right. So what unites us with Republican Party here in United States. So of course, love to the Fatherland, but at the same time, I think we see quite similar challenges for our society. So immigration, I think we should be tougher. We did a good job last government, you know, in 2021, Lukashenko started illegal immigration flows to the planet, and we were quite, I would say, brave for stopping it, starting the redirection policy, building the fence. It's not a wall, but very effective fence. And shown to Europe, which was always really political correct on immigration, but you need to defend the borders. The countries has the borders, you know, and you need to defend and I think it's a big linkage with Republicans in United States. So of course, freedom of personality, creativity, but also the community, your nation, defending the nation, freedom and independence. So of course, we can have many other bridges, but main, main ways, I would also say that
Lithuania is actually more free market by the Heritage index of economic freedom. You guys are at the 16th spot. We're at the 26th spot. So you can teach us a little bit about free markets. Again, because of the culture to start a business, it's pretty easy, liquidity, locals, entrepreneurship. So I think that's also another tie between the two political movements, yeah,
sure, ideologically, of course. But I should say, because we have some Christian democratic tradition, we are more, I would say, linked to this Adenauer model of German Christian Democrats of social market economy, which created German economical miracle after Second World War, it's a little bit middle way. It's free market, but at the same time with some social welfare for some part of the people who needs help, not giving the fish, but giving the instrument how to take the fish. So this is, this is, this is, I would say maybe we a little bit in the middle, but with rankings, especially when it comes from it sometimes looks like miracle, because, you know, we had so big bureaucracy for many things. That's why you should send me this, this ranking,
I think another similarity too. And I. Pointed this out in my writing and reporting, I would say of any country in Europe, maybe outside of Czech Republic, Lithuania, is probably the loudest voice against the CCP. And you see in Republican circles today, or conservative movement writ large, here in America, that we also have a similar tone being very skeptical of China. Would you say that's also another similarity, and you guys have taken a lot of heat for Oh yeah, closing the CCP, oh yeah,
yeah. We are like icebreaker in Europe on absolutely new, new policy in China. I was the initiator of abolishing Huawei to participate in 5g projects in Lithuania. We bench in his investment into our clipped a port, the only strategic port. Also, you know, we have exceptional relations with Taiwan, and yes, China tried to harass us. China not only sanctioned us, not only level at the diplomatic level, but also we try to harass the companies, international companies, who in their chain has some Lithuanian element, especially German companies and so on. So we were under pressure. But the policy which was before what we are quite resilient in China. We have no investment of Chinese in the 20 strategic assets. It gave us the opportunity to survive this pressure and to show for our countries you can survive without China, as Lithuanians are doing, you know, so but you know, role model is good. But I could not say what a lot of European countries took the same path I would like to have it more well, hopefully
people listening to this conversation and then my subsequent report will see that Lithuania has led on this and maybe urge their contacts. Or maybe people in the EU will read and and see that Lithuania is kind of like a good example to follow. And maybe here in the United States, they could use individuals like you to leverage EU to be more tough on China and to kind of take, I would say, a more limited government free market approach, because we've had conversations. I know our vice president has gone to Munich and had some interesting messages for Europeans there, but talk about your purpose for visiting Washington this week? Obviously, the Ukraine, Russia conflict, that's very top of mind. Things got very needed last week. As we're talking today, it's been revealed that a possible minerals deal between the United States and Ukraine has strike, has been stricken, or has been a deal has been reached, rather, and we'll see the details later on in the President's joint address before Congress. But it's the point of the visit to kind of calm tensions, to kind of reassure the United States the Trump administration that there is peace on the on the horizon, that importance of working with Europe still matters.
First of all, to understand how Trump administration is acting and working. Who, who are the key decision makers? Where is the logic of some kind of decisions? Because, you know, where we have some debates. Of course, we all are for peace. But the question is, it will be a just peace or unjust peace if it isn't just peace, if it's not eliminates the real sources of the war aggression, it can frozen it, but it can heat up in several years because Russia can reestablish itself. And, you know, we can try another time, if we are not, you know, punished for this aggression. You know, another time in Ukraine or somewhere else, even in it. So that's why we just trying to understand what the concessions, of course, should do both sides. But now we're hearing only on concessions from Ukrainian side, and we'd like to, you know, to see more pressure on Russia to sit on the table, but also to make some conscious concessions. So here is like a main our like direction. Why we are here, you know, to feel the post, understand how it works in is it? Is it? Is it just, you know how, how it should look like this Ukrainian deal? At the same time, we have another vital thing for our national security independence. It's American Posture in Europe. We have armored battalion in bobrader. It's okay, about 1000 American soldiers, but it's a crucial factor. When Americans are coming. Everybody knows what is coming, the force, the power, who adversaries are afraid. So our aim, strategic aim, to at least keep this posture, especially on Mr. Flank. You. Or maybe if it's possible to increase it, because we as a nation trying to be very good to host nation, investing in infrastructure, for tradings, for, you know, readiness, building of your troops and so on, so on. So we're still saying very clear, America is a white of our independence. We are doing a lot of ourselves. We now have almost 4% of GDP. For defense, the ADA is to have even five 6% of GDP. Yeah, something like that. It's not so easy, but the plan is on the table. We as a position, we will support that plan, if it will be clever, wise plan. And of course, of course, we are showing also example, but we need to invest in your own security and defense. But without America in Europe, it will be hard. So our message also is, you know, you invest in us. We will invest in Europe. For example. We have Baltic security initiative. It's Congress program which funds Baltic states on defense, but $1 which goes to us gives you back $3 with our procurement from United States. And we will continue procurement. We are buying himals, we are buying Black Hawks, we are buying GL TVs. We have been buying many good, good American weaponry. I don't think
the President has any faults with the Baltics or Poland. And even amidst that kind of interesting meeting that everyone has seen and heard about last Friday, he did also say that Poland and the Baltics, nothing will change there. So I think he for anyone listening, in Europe, there's not going to be any changes, because he knows that they are not delinquent in the defense quotient spending. It's not them that he has to worry about it, or that he's worried about he's worried about Western Europe who's not paying their quotient. They talk a great deal about supporting Ukraine, and then they don't want to follow through, much like Central Eastern Europe Baltics have done with that. So I don't think you got and
I agree with the president here. I mean, and the first term of President Trump was, I think, affected some of European nations to invest more into defense. Maybe it was not enough. I agree. And that's a new way for pushing all countries to do more, and we will gonna do more. I also wanted
to ask you about staying on the on the topic of Western Europe in the kind of this refusal to help Ukraine. So it was recently revealed that I think in the EU budget, they imported about $22 billion worth of oil and gas from Russia, still, and then they're talk. They're talking with a double message in terms of saying, who supports Ukraine, and yet they're still ironically funding Russia. They're taking in their imports more than any money appropriated for defending Ukraine. Lithuania, of course, much like the other two Baltics just fully unyoked itself or fully decoupled itself from the electric grid, from the holdover from Soviet times, and you guys were already weaning yourself off of imports of Russian oil and gas. But hasn't the rest of Europe followed your lead? Yet
cheap gas is, you know, very favorable for the governments who wants to, you know, to build their economies on cheap gas. And yeah, you're right. Yeah, we did a lot of things during last 15 years on energy independence, and my party was leading on that. So first step what we did was the gas thing. We were 100% dependent on Gazprom, state owned oligarchic company, which had many intermediaries who made the influence on our government 20 years ago and and it looked like very situationally, very badly, we even sold them our strategic assets to the gas pump when we made reform and took back Our infrastructure and get pushed back Gazprom and we created the infrastructure for LNG, and we have LNG terminal, which is like a source of gas independence. 50% of liquid gas is coming from United States, from Louisiana, so, and we would like to increase that. You know, electricity, another angle. We just finished two weeks ago. We were, as I was saying, we were members, and we are members of NATO and EU but still on electricity. We were dependent on the on Eurasia and Russians. Now it's not so I think it's tremendous for others nations of Europe. Seems it's not so important question. We don't not see energy as a tool of Russia. Answer the mistake, because it is a tool and economical arguments to be cheaper and just not consider. Living them as a geopolitical tool.
Is there anything else you want to add that we haven't touched upon about the Lithuanian American relationship that people again may not know about Lithuania and how much overlap we have, I would say, even as conservatives, even if the difference is spotted, obviously a love of freedom, a very independent streak, you know, very skeptical of foreign adversaries, anything else you want to touch upon. You know,
conservative America, the thing which I like, all ideas, you know, values, principles and interests, especially in a foreign affairs. And here, I feel a little bit that there is a competition between this conservative America still responsible for the whole world order, or, more easily, zionistic way of thinking. So I would like to wish what conservative in Europe is waiting for American leadership, for American conservative leadership, and many things internal things, which was adopted during one month of the President, I think it was very good things.
Yeah, it's surprisingly, a lot of good things are happening, despite, like some things you may hear, and a lot of things are working out, because I think there is an interest to shrink government. Our government has become very, very big, and a lot of people agree, even beyond kind of the headlines, maybe we could serve as a template for Europe, and I think especially on the conversation of green energy we were talking before going live. ESG investing is also starting to be reassessed in Europe. I do a lot of assessment, and I've noticed that, like our leadership there, on energy, on many things I think can help influence Europe in the right way, without lecturing and demeaning, of course, but I think even on things like energy and investing strategies, we may even see Europe hopefully, you know, our friends there, like like Lithuania, respond similarly and recognize that too much of a onerous rule making would make an in terms of your American investments in Europe. A lot of the corporations have said these EU, ESG guidelines, I think there's four or five different ones have made it extremely complicated to invest in Europe.
Yeah. So Europe is, you know, also have protectionism and now, and we always fighting for open Europe, especially open for America, because
is the running joke that the everything in the EU innovation goes to die. I think because I saw that there was like one Universal USB, and then in America there was, it was like a meme where it showed, like, China copies, us, debates and then regulates,
yeah, exactly Europe, maybe looking, probably the lead the charge, deregulation, deregulation, deregulation would be
we need to do something, you know, we deal, I think the rise of some far right people in Europe, but very far right, you know, which a friendly version, sometimes too much. You know, it's because immigration, which is not controlled, and because of green, absolutely unproportional. You know, pushing regulations because, you know, you can how to explain to middle class German or even lower middle class German citizen, but you will not go buy diesel car, exactly. So it's even another big stupidity, I would say, you know. So, so, you know. Anyway, you know, we try to, you know, to find political groups who will defend against such kind of regulations, and we try to support some kind of parties for right parties, I would say. So this is a thing we should fix, and now a Conservative government, more conservative government in Germany with Friedrichs, we're trying to find a balance green and industrialization. Decarbonization and industrialization will be not easy, but we will, we will try, and we will try to
well, Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for chatting with me. I hope you enjoy your visit to America, and if I can be helpful in getting more conservatives to understand Lithuania and how much we have in common, I'd be more than happy to be helpful to you. Let's work together. Do.