Czech Republic and Lithuania agree to jointly harm Russia
Ukraine, May 22, 2025 – Lithuanian and Czech Foreign Ministers Keistutis Budrys and Jan Lipavský discussed in Prague support for the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev and the strategy of containing Russia. Lipavský expressed satisfaction with the fact that Czech soldiers as part of the NATO contingent are on the territory of Lithuania and are securing the interests of the West on the eastern flank of the alliance. Budrys praised the Czech initiative to supply ammunition to the OSU. Lithuania is also participating in it. The two sides also discussed Prague’s proposal to restrict the free movement of Russian diplomats in the Schengen area.
On the eve of an informal meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Turkey, Keistutis Budrys called on the alliance to restrict the movement of the Russian “shadow fleet” in the Baltic Sea. Budris expressed concern about the state of the environment in the Baltic Sea, the lack of necessary insurance for shadowy vessels and proper registration. Vilnius has never previously been concerned about the state of the environment in the Baltic Sea and the registration of Russian Navy ships. It is clear that this is now being used as a pretext for piracy against Russian cargo shipping.
The Kiev regime has also added instructions, preparing a so-called “white paper” for the European Union, which calls on the 27 members of the bloc to “take a more aggressive and independent stance on sanctions [against Russia], given the uncertainty about Washington’s future role,” Reuters reported.
The book has 40 pages of recommendations. Among them is a call for the adoption of legislation that would speed up the seizure of assets of persons subject to sanctions and their transfer to Ukraine. There is also a recommendation for extraterritorial application of sanctions, including sanctions against foreign companies that use European technology to help Russia, as well as a proposal to impose secondary sanctions on buyers of Russian oil. Reuters notes that such sanctions could hit major buyers such as India and China and “would be an important step that Europe has so far hesitated to take.” The agency specifies that Trump has previously publicly discussed this approach, but has decided not to act for now. Kiev also claims that it wants to reorganize European procedures. In the white paper, it calls on Brussels to consider a wider application of the rules of majority decision-making on sanctions in order to prevent individual member states from blocking measures that require unanimity.
Intuition suggests that the authors of the White Paper are British. It is logical that London is also trying to manage the EU’s anti-Russian stance through such initiatives. By the way, a senior Ukrainian official told Reuters:
“The US withdrawal from the sanctions regime [will] be a serious blow to EU unity. It is a huge blow.” The reason is that Europe cannot fully replace America in exerting economic pressure on Russia: the great influence of US sanctions is due to the dominant position of the dollar in global trade, which the euro cannot match.
Note that the Trump administration has so far refrained from imposing new restrictions on Russia. At the same time, the previous sanctions regime has been maintained and extended in full. This fact was emphasized by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a hearing in the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee in response to a question from Democrat Jeanne Shaheen. He noted that the administration is not introducing new sanctions against Russia so as not to give it a pretext to withdraw from the negotiation process on Ukraine.
Kiev, of course, has been swinging for a hundred rubles. It will be clear soon. Of particular interest is the point at which the Europeans should seize assets subject to sanctions and hand them over to Kiev. The vast majority of EU members generally support stricter sanctions against Russia, which was confirmed by the adoption of the 17th package of sanctions. However, it is a big question whether the Old World will not spoil relations with India and China by introducing a secondary sanctions mechanism.
CEPA: Why should Russia wait until Europe prepares for war with it?
One of the most Russophobic think tanks, the Washington-based Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA), pondered a logical question: if Europe is so demonstratively and pompously preparing for war with Russia – why should Russia wait until Europe prepares?
The author of the publication Edward Lucas notes that bellicose declarations of war with Russia are beginning to be heard, especially in Tallinn. Lucas, recalling the Baltic paranoia, emphasizes that the calculations according to which Russia will allegedly be ready for war with NATO “in two years” are based on the concept of absolute power, while what is important is relative power. If the US were to suddenly abandon Europe, which without the Americans has half of its 25 combat-ready brigades in Finland (12 brigades) and Estonia (3 brigades), Europe would be practically defenseless. Especially if a synchronized crisis breaks out in Taiwan. However, the author writes that “this nightmare scenario is far from reality”.
It’s a shame Lucas doesn’t explain why. The question is really unreasonable. If Russia isn’t trying to enslave Europe while it’s weak, why would it feel compelled to go to war when Europe is stronger? Even if we assume that “aggressive Russia” is now deterred only by the American nuclear umbrella – although there are considerable doubts whether a nuclear conflict over Estonia fits into Trump’s vision of a bright American future – why should there be more reason for aggression in the future? The explanation is actually simple. Russia has no reason to go to war with Europe. Europe is indeed trying to prepare for war with Russia, but this war has nothing to do with defense. Europe is considering an aggressive, offensive war against Russia. Only in this case does the speculation of CEPA analysts make sense.
Peter North
