I would like to address the recurring question of those “ordinary Russians” who “shouldn’t be sanctioned”.🧵1/7
I hear talk of ordinary Russians’ innocence, but then I see ordinary Russians murdering ordinary Ukrainians.🧵2/7
I see ordinary Russian mothers saying goodbye to their ordinary Russian sons and wishing them good luck with their ordinary Russian war crimes.🧵3/7
I see ordinary Russians celebrating murder. I see ordinary Russian parents dressing up their ordinary Russian children in military uniforms and painting the letter Z on a cardboard tank costume.🧵4/7
I see ordinary Russians coming together to make a huge Z formation in the town square.🧵5/7
Ordinary Russia is sick. Healing will be a long and gruelling process which can only start when Russia, not just Putin, is defeated. Without a defeat in Ukraine, Russia will just keep spreading.🧵6/7
So about those “unfair” sanctions against “ordinary Russians”... Well, anything which slows down Russia’s total war machine will have ordinary Lithuanians’ support. Whatever victory takes. Slava Ukraini.🧵7/7
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Bloomberg reports that the EU is considering dropping its @wto case against China due to a "lack of evidence" that China's sudden halt in trade with Lithuania was retribution for supporting Taiwan. Dropping the case is a bad idea, but don't worry, it gets worse.🧵1/6
Withdrawing without even waiting for the official ruling means abandoning the defence of the single market, accepting China's argument and allowing a precedent to be set. China could then attack any other country in the same way.🧵2/6
Lithuanian customs data unquestionably show a sudden drop in trade from €300mln to zero in a matter of days. If the EU fought the case to the end, but didn’t win, there would be grounds to complain and demand a review of the way such decisions are made.🧵3/6
So… what can you do with a nuclear bully? 1. Provide protection to the victims 2. Punish escalation with escalation
🧵1/7
If a country does not have the protection of its own nukes, or the nukes of friendly allies, unfriendly nuclear powers will come along and threaten it into submission. Bullies attack the unprotected.
🧵2/7
As Zelenskyy said in the Fridman interview, NATO membership is a quick and solid security guarantee… but a simple ceasefire and signed agreement is not.
🧵3/7
🧵There are five illusions about Ukraine that lead to flawed “peace” plans that are doomed to fail. I have listed the illusions here in the hope that reality-based discussions can soon become the norm.👇
1️⃣2️⃣3️⃣4️⃣5️⃣
1️⃣The Illusion of Diplomacy.
Diplomacy alone cannot keep Ukraine safe. Words must be backed up by strength on the battlefield. To get a fair deal you have to carry a very big stick, not just an olive branch. Ukraine must be much stronger if Europe wants to stay secure.👇
2️⃣The Illusion of Expense.
The headline figures of "billions" create the illusion that we can't afford to do more. But when the pandemic hit, we raised €750bn in the EU alone. The amounts needed to secure victory and lasting peace for Ukraine are small in comparison.👇
The peacemongers have failed.
Escalation was not managed, conflicts were not contained, people were not protected, laws were not respected. Now I hear victory is "unrealistic" and not even worth fighting for. But I see things very differently, and here's why. 👇🧵1/10
The messy failure and total bankruptcy of our strategy is hard to watch. In desperation some hallucinate that a “peace agreement” would be achievable, effective, practical and sustainable, a magic wand to make all the bad things go away. 🧵2/10
Some hope a “peace agreement” would not only wash away our sins, but also make people forget that victory has always been possible. Sure, we could have won at any time, even now, but we chose to lose instead. Worse than that, we forced our choice on Ukraine. 🧵3/10
Idealists say aggression is fundamentally unacceptable. Realists say Russia is so strong that resistance is futile and acceptance is the only answer.
Well, I say we are strong enough to defend our ideals, and fighting back is the most realistic choice. Here's why. 👇🧵1/16
Russia is attacking Ukraine not because of a threat, a diplomatic dispute or a broken promise. Russia is attacking solely because, in the Kremlin's view, Ukraine is weaker and therefore attackable. In other words, the attacks would stop if Ukraine was stronger. 2/16
We have gone back to the times of geopolitical power competition. International law and the UN Charter are being ignored and overridden by force. We must therefore increase our own strength to reverse this trend. 3/16
If all NATO members followed Lithuania and increased defence spending to at least 3% of GDP, there would be an extra $270bn available for supporting Ukraine and defending NATO's borders. I hear this is politically "impossible", but here's how Lithuania did it: 🧵1/12
Public support for defence spending requires a new social contract and a widespread understanding of the risks of inaction. In Lithuania, we understand the risk of Russian aggression far too well, our civilians have died under T-72 tanks. 🧵2/12
In countries with no experience of occupation by Russia there is a tendency to underestimate the risks to all of Europe that are being posed by this “regional conflict”. Such terminology is incorrect. This is now a global struggle for rules-based freedom and prosperity. 🧵3/12