Linas Linkevicius, Foreign Minister of Lithuania HARDtalk

Welcome to HARDtalk, I'm Stephen Sackur.

What impact will the election of Donald Trump have

Judging from the expressions of alarm coming from Eastern Europe,

it could tilt the balance of power decisively in favour of Russia

as regional tensions rise, but is that just scaremongering?

My guest today is Lithuania's Foreign Minister, Linas Linkevicius,

who recently described himself as very afraid

Linas Linkevicius, welcome to HARDtalk.

Just a few days ago, you did something really extraordinary.

You told your own people that you were feeling very afraid.

Let's accomplish the sentence to the end because there is no

reason to go to the extremes, to be panicked or to be relaxed.

We should find some middle approach, I believe.

Very afraid because of Russia's intentions, you said?

You said that, over the next couple of months, you feared.

To be precise, I was talking about the period before I assume

responsibilities, end of January, much time to go.

I was talking about that sensitive period, and we should be

You said that the Russians may "step up aggression.

"Russia is not a superpower, it is a superproblem."

Yes, indeed, because the GDP of Russia is less than Italy

They do have nuclear weapons, unfortunately

But the rest is very dangerous when they are testing,

probing, testing reactions, whether somebody will do

something at all if something is happening in the world.

And this period of uncertainty is really a period for testing,

for all of us, of our leadership, of our resilience,

I was afraid that something would happen in the

Aleppo will be smashed to the ground, for

I think, today, we are not going to talk so much

We are going to talk about what you fear might happen

We are living on the continent, which is also surrounded

You can either seek to calm situations down or you can stoke

the flames of attention and potential conflict.

It just strikes me as odd that your government,

and I'm just looking at the record of the recent past, you've

reintroduced military conscription, you produced a pretty amazing

pamphlet which advises the civilian population on what to do in terms

of an invasion from an enemy, and one can only assume

You've also launched a telephone hotline for citizens

to report on anyone they suspect of being a spy.

Look, I know these emotions are important, but it's

very important, really, to find this middle position,

and we shouldn't scare our people more than is needed.

And to do ourselves what we have to do.

When we are talking that Nato must remain capable,

must react to the current challenges, and it's done,

by the way, it's in the process, decisions which were taken in Wales

and later, Warsaw, being implemented, and we are very

happy with the process, regardless of the noise

But while we are expecting that Nato will deliver,

So what you mentioned, conscripts to the Army,

I was the former Defence Minister and, frankly, I was never in favour

of abolishing conscripts, but now we're back to that.

Increasing defence spending, we are criticised even by President

It's legitimate criticism, by the way, but we will give no

We will do that and we are that doing already, and the dynamics

So we are doing what we have to do ourselves.

I was going to save it for a while and get to it later

It's pretty extraordinary as you are telling your own people,

family by family, that they should prepare for the possibility

of an invasion, you are telling them to look out for spies at home,

but your government doesn't even pay the Nato threshold of 2% of GDP

Yes, I agree, so why is it not a fact which we have now?

We are paying, our dynamics have increased the best among Nato.

We are paying 1.8% and, by 2018, it will be 2%.

But it makes it seem like you are crying wolf a little bit.

You do all of this stuff, telling your own people

they are in grave danger, but you don't even get serious

enough to spend 2% of GDP on defence!

You would be right if you would criticise me some years ago

but you are not quite correct because we are talking about now,

and this is commitment shared by all political parties,

it's sustainable and really no reason for whomever

We have, all Europeans, we have to be serious on this,

and defence spending, as you know, as you said

Fulfilling the threshold, that's the point.

We will get back to that later on but at the heart of all of this

is your contention that Vladimir Putin represents a real

That would be not correct, if we talk just about our region.

I think he represents a threat to all the world.

But I want to know what is your specific evidence?

Because I'm very mindful that Moscow responds to the sorts

of things you say by saying, you've got this is the completely

We, in Russia, are responding to Nato expansionism,

Nato is putting more and more troops on our western flank,

Nato is putting elite forces into exercises,

unprecedented in the history of the North Atlantic

Treaty Organisation, right on our border,

it's Nato that's flexing its muscle, not us.

This is a very good trick for their propaganda.

They are very gifted in accusing others about what they are doing

And those who are experts and, knowing the situation more

precisely, they know that it's nothing even to compare when we're

talking about the number of troops on the border, jets,

activity in the vicinity of our airspace or territorial

waters number of snap exercises or concentration

of new weapons or modernised jets, nothing by far to compare.

You talk about the missiles, nuclear capable missiles

put into Kaliningrad, obviously very close

But the point is, the Russians say, we see what Nato's up to.

There were 4000 troops in Lithuania on the Operation Iron Sword

I just went to Poland earlier this year, spoke to the US

He was telling me about all the preparations they are making

to repel a Russian attack with vast numbers of troops and

Nato is making these plans right on Russia's border.

What's Vladimir Putin supposed to do?

He says that nothing to compare. We talk about numbers, frequency of

exercises. They are accusing others that they have to use these

responsive measures but in fact we are using that. But we will not

escalate. But at the same time, no one should doubt that we will make

sure our security is guaranteed. Everything we have talked about has

been unfolding over months and years. The Russian intervention in

Ukraine was a key moment for you. But the key new element that we have

to wrestle with the day is the election of Donald Trump and the

United States. How rattled or shocked or disappointed with you by

the US election result? There is no reason to be shoptalk disappointed,

we should face reality and respect the decisions of Americans. But you

did not want Trump to win because he has made it plain he has an

admiration for Vladimir Putin, he wants to work much more closely with

him, and his intention and priority is to work with the Russians on

counterterror and not get so worked up about what Russia is doing in

your region. Let's not talk about everything at once but fragments. He

criticised Nato. He says an less Nato is fundamentally reformed

common here is not interested. Businessman Trump was briefed about

Nato because he was not involved in foreign policy. Other issues were

discussed but not foreign policy. He was briefed on how nature works and

was informed that the US should pay 70% of Nato bills course he was not

happy. So this is a reminder of enforcement, what we are doing. I

agree. Maybe it was done sharply but he was right. Here is a quote from

Donald Trump in the year 2000. America has no vital interest in

choosing between warring factions whose animosities go back centuries

in Eastern Europe. You can mention more statements. But there was an

electoral campaign, there were statements statements and

corrections. But responsibility now comes. When the administration is in

place, they have to be responsible for everything. I simply cannot

imagine... I know foreign ministers are to be diplomatic but be honest.

Let's have the truth on this one. When Newt Gingrich last summer,

close advice and support of Donald Trump, he said, Estonia is in the

suburbs of St Petersburg, 40% of Estonia is Russian, I am not sure if

I would risk nuclear war of some place in the suburbs of St

Petersburg. I am simply pointing out that these are the kinds of people

but Donald Trump is taking his advice from getting his mindset

from. I meant other people quite close to President-elect Trump, like

the former mayor of new York. He was very passionate and enthusiastic

about Baltic states. In general, I cannot imagine he'd changed his

mind. I'm not advocating statements made by Newt Gingrich which were not

correct. We were not happy with the statements because they were not

polite and frankly wrong. Estonia is not a suburb of St Petersburg! That

is what we could call a rhetorical flourish. But what I would say to

you is that the evidence is, and leave aside the detail of Trump,

because it is yet to be seen what he would do, but the mindset in

Washington as a whole, and one could even say that Barack Obama shed this

to a certain extent, is to question the utility of Nato as it works at

the present time. Would you accept that? No. Nato is one of the most

successful organisations in history in terms of security. I have no

doubt it will be sent to the normal proper places. There was a phone

call recently between the Secretary General of Nato and President-elect

Trump. I have no doubt that the US will remain a leader of Nato. It

will happen. And we should not just put aside the argument that a team

is coming. Over 4000 officials will be appointed, approved by the Senate

and Congress. But it will come from a Republican poll, which is well

known. I could imagine corrections but I do not agree that there will

be some revolution or U-turn or major changes in the traditional

position of the United States. I think perhaps you may be missing a

trend in the United States. I interviewed a former Defence

Secretary and he said the US Congress is not interested in

funding Nato in the future. I was present during his speech. You know

the President Obama used the phrase free riders will you was frustrated

with Nato members who do not pay your way. You are a small country of

3 million in a small organisation. How will you persuade those free

riders that unless the step up to the plate, they are jeopardising the

very future of the organisation? When we try to draw attention of the

world after 2008, we all remember, we were condemning what happened, we

made statements. In a few months, we got back to business as usual

because there were calls to be pragmatic and diplomatic, economy,

trade is important. We were told we were wrong, we should be consistent.

We're not saying anybody should believe what we are saying but how

they should respect our decisions. Those were lessons not learned by us

but by others, by Russia, and they realised that in the 21st century,

it is possible to redraw the borders of Europe with little damage. That

was not the first but one of the lessons in 2008. Personally I said

it would be Crimea. Crimea already happened. Crimea, which Donald Trump

has indicated is minded to recognise Russian sovereignty. I doubt that

will happen. I cannot imagine. We have to respect world order. If

somebody that order... Some may say that you sound like a man in denial!

Why a? You say to me I'd put to you these various things that Trump has

said, and you just say I refuse to think about it. I did not say that.

I am just trying to invite you and give a chance for them to deliver

something and then we will judge. It would be counter-productive to

prejudge or conclude or panic or shock or terror. It is not helpful.

If we need to preserve what was invested in done together, for the

sake of each other, not at the expense of each other. It will come.

I know their own nuances, there were statements I was not happy with, but

it is an electoral campaign. It is different now. It is a few days

since the election result became clear. We have that key

appointments, like a man who says he wants to reset relations with

Moscow. Are any of these people restart your government? There was

some congressmen sending messages, I remember, saying, if something would

happen, it was addressed to people in Poland, we will be there, Trump

will be there if necessary. There were statements. There was no direct

contact. Is that bit disappointing? Let's not jump to conclusions, it is

not professional to be disappointed! If it is not professional to be

disappointed, let me not express disappointment but surprise that,

after having told me everything about the need for Nato to be

strong, stick together, show a clear message to Vladimir Putin, how many

troops does your country actually provide right now to the Nato rapid

response force? We are providing not just of the Nato rapid response

force but we have our own. Please answer the question. We are sending

up to 1000 or even more. As I understood from the reading I have

done, you currently provide just over 200 infantry troops. In

defencemen. We have 2500, our own rapid reaction troops. But this is

about the contribution to Nato. Nato is demanding much greater

solidarity. OK, we are a small country, our total size of the force

is not big, nobody expects quantity but quality. We are providing very

high-quality special troops. They are active in Afghanistan. You can

suppose they are with and the SS and a performance highly. So the quality

of what we provide is really sufficient. Quantity will not be

impressive but it is not our goal. We have to contribute but also do

ourselves. You should not neglect what I said, 2500 national troops.

It is the same segment. We have talked a lot about Nato and the

United States after the Trump victory. Let's now focus on Europe

itself. It seems to me you have a big problem in Europe as well. For

all of your appeals for European solidarity, there are a number of

governments and political parties in Europe are showing increasing signs

of getting disaffected from on Russia and are beginning to make

noises, saying, we should have a warmer relationship with Moscow. Why

is this happening? Many reasons that I cannot disclose but I can provide

you with examples. When we talk about our legacy, it is one story,

when we talk about the rest of Europe... I am thinking of Hungary,

Bulgaria, which is just elected a President who has said, let's end

sanctions against Moscow. There are some politicians. Speaking about

Bulgaria, it is not only one man creating the situation. The problem

is, and you quite rightly noticed, this is applicable to Europe and

overseas, populism is taking over and people do not listen to the

arguments, they take decisions by emotion. Politicians should feel

responsible for that. Why does populism involve a warmer

relationship with Putin? Lack of leadership, missing targets. You did

not want to touch on Aleppo but let me mention, there are family photos,

organisations in charge, United Nations. People are being killed.

People are frustrated. They do not believe in peace and order in the

world or these organisations. It is applicable to the governments and

people, and they are punishing their governments when they vote for a

referendum so elections, they are punishing current governments, not

necessarily voting for the question raised during the referendum. It is

something we have to address seriously otherwise we will lose the

catch everywhere and this is big. There are intelligence officials and

the United States and Europe and commentators who say Russia is

playing a very clever game here. They are using information,

propaganda, other forms of reach out to people and parties in Europe. In

conventional warfare, there was an artillery attack before a real

battle, now there is no need. You can brainwash. Brainwash? ! You are

saying Moscow has the programme of brainwashing? It happened in Crimea,

the people were brainwashed by state-controlled media, spreading

lies, it is a big weapon. You are saying they are doing the same thing

in Europe? Everywhere, and also the UK, in France, Italy. Evidence? If

people are complacent but they are doing, if there are ideas, let's

knew something because is provocative, it is wrong. Not doing

is provocative, not acting when you need to act is provocative. I am not

hearing any evidence brainwashing. In Crimea, people were convinced by

state media that bandits and fascists were coming to kill them.

It was well known. We know that from our sources, we were scared. They

welcomed Russian soldiers who came to save them. This is a massive

psychological attack, brainwashing. How can it be called in your view? I

see no evidence that there is brainwashing in Europe. There have

been allegations of Russians giving the French far right party money. It

is financed by sources outside and it is a caper people, it is fine

with everyone. Or if you have a referendum in some country, taking

hostage the Ukraine, as was in the Netherlands, for instance. So you

see this as a pattern? People are realising something when it comes

close, personally. Thinking happened after MH 17. If something happens in

Europe, it is our continent. Maybe we should end with this thought.

Isn't that should do everything we have discussed, the triumphs of

Trump, the messages he is delivering, right now, it looks as

if Vladimir Putin is getting his way? He is always getting his way

because he is testing, probing, testing whether we will react, how

will it will react, he continues to do what he has to do, those are his

methods. So you are still very afraid? It would be wrong if it is

just our problem. It is our own problem. Time will come and we will

see ourselves but how many wake-up calls are needed to wake up? It

depends. It is better to wake up when it is time to wake up. Thank

you very much for being an HARDtalk. Most of us can look forward to

plenty of fine sunny weather tomorrow. You need to wear layers to

keep the cold out. A hard frost setting here. Mild across the far

north