The main subject of the oncoming Summit in Prague is the initiative of “Eastern Partnership”. How do You see its future especially after the latest events in Moldova and opposition protests in Georgia?
I would say simply that “Eastern Partnership” – is a fishing rod for each country individually. We won’t compare Moldova to Ukraine, Georgia to Moldova or Azerbaijan to Ukraine. All these countries have different situation, as well as geographic location. So there is no ground to compare these countries. This is simply a chance for them, and it’s up to them to decide on the importance of this chance. We want this belt of democracy to grasp this area as wide and tight as possible, in a positive sense of course. For these people to say good bye to the past and to establish the world of democracy and security.
“Eastern Partnership” is a Polish-Swedish initiative…
I would like to specify that this initiative resulted from the meeting of two Presidents – Kaczy?ski and Adamkus. I consider the change of partners as positive. The participation of Sweden and withdrawal of Lithuania is fine as well as that today this initiative is called Polish-Swedish. As a matter of fact we should acknowledge that this has greater power. But we have no grieve, as considering from pragmatic point of view, this promoted the successful establishment of this eastern policy.
The uniqueness of Lithuania is concluded in the fact that it borders to a single country included into the list of “Eastern Partnership” – Belarus. When they say about realp?litik it is first of all associated with Berlin policy. It means that economy plays a first part, and only then it comes for EU fundamental values. Possibly to say that lately Lithuania has adjusted its policy without absolutization of realp?litik. Will Vilnius adjust its steps in respect of such a complicated neighbor as Belarus?
I think and Lithuanian Foreign Minister Ušackas stated repeatedly that our policy should be logical. There are tactic issues, but we should underline that this eastern policy has started shaping only now. Before this we developed the shape, structure of this policy. You are talking about Germany and its pragmatism. But who incited the process of shaping this policy and gaining the approval of the whole EU as a counter to Mediterranean countries? All these happened during the presidency of Germany in the EU. So we should pay it a debt, considering its political weight. It managed to do the thing, that we are expecting in Prague at the moment, i.e. it managed to establish this policy de jure.
The President of Lithuania Valdas Adamkus suggested creating Transatlantic Energy Council. How is this prospect real?
In principle, it’s another attempt to create global energy policy, of equal care of Americans and Europeans. We should acknowledge that until now the USA have cared more of European energy security than Europe itself. Dwelling, for example, on oil pipeline Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, the only alternative construction, than it wouldn’t operate without support and initiative of the USA.
It would have been suspended as Nabucco, that was almost crossed out of the EU priority projects. It demonstrates one thing once more – Europe is not yet able to assure its unique energy policy without the USA support, financial support. This is its weak point. That is why the idea of Transatlantic Energy Council is one of the ways. Maybe it will work out.
The Russia – NATO Council on Ambassador level will start working in the end of April. Lithuania logically supported the idea that it’s still early to resume the activity of this Council as Russia hasn’t yet accomplished its obligations on Georgia… Georgia held NATO trainings and Russia wasn’t delighted about it. How do you think should Lithuania act in this respect? Should it keep on defending its point of view that hasn’t gained overwhelming support, or should Lithuania adjust its position?
We had different approaches. Our opponents insisted on the urgency of talking, because non-talking is worse. Consensus is consensus. And we agreed, but there were some conditions including, roughly speaking, the condition to keep in mind the situation in Georgia. During NATO Summit it all was in communiqué. Nothing new, but the positions remained unchanged: on bases, territory occupation, quasi-states recognition.
On the other hand, now we’ll see whether there will be any reaction from Russia. The upholders of the Council activity resuming said, that signs from Russia were urgent. And we’ll see what kind of good will Russia will demonstrate.Then the reaction of our partners will be interesting.
Referring to the latest events in Moldova, protests of opposition in Georgia, how do You think is the further NATO extension real, regarding the inclusion of such new members as Georgia, Ukraine?
I think, there will be no efforts as no one needs “overload” that is able to produce definite troubles. For some Portuguese or Spanish government it is pretty difficult to understand “why” and “how” do the events in Moldova happen – robbery, and from the other hand normal protest. And we can’t blame them. Another question is “what” and “who” stands behind all these. I’d like to repeat, if there is no political will to develop in this direction (to NATO) – no one will help or give any advances. The way to NATO is limited with pretty simple criteria – democracy.
When we see that Georgia makes moves in this direction, when there is a legitimate president, protesting opposition, than the country moves forward. Its part is occupied, but I think if someone considers it to be the greatest obstacle – I disagree. If the rest unoccupied part will develop properly, than nothing will prevent Georgia to join NATO.
Lithuania interests are definitely corresponding with the essence of the “Eastern Partnership” initiative. It was evident from the geography of visits of former and current Lithuanian Government…
I think that tactics can change, but the ground will remain. Security and democracy in Georgia and in Caucasus in general, in Moldova, in Ukraine, not mentioning Belarus – our greatest interests. Everything is interconnected at the moment.
The only system that is able to assure stability and relative security – is democracy. And NATO is an individual choice of each country. We are interested for democracy, security and as possible prosperity to be there (in the countries included into the “Eastern Partnership” – DELFI). As we are supporting Georgia not because they strive to join NATO, but as are eager to become a democratic state. All these six countries are different. No one expects that “Eastern Partnership” will produce the same results within these states.
Thank You.
Watch the video related to USA politics
Alex Jones clearly explains who is to blame for the world’s financial problems. Media analysts try to place blame on free market capitalism or the greedy middle class. However, the blame lies solely on the fraudulent Federal Reserve system. This quasi government corporation prints money out of thin air (at interest to US taxpayers), manipulating interest rates, devaluing currencies, and creating artificial boom and bust cycles. The American people need to understand how this system operates …
The iron curtain, policed by smooth talking swinehundt in silken nooses and oxford shirts.
Do the math. Why are American dis-info channels largely sceptical of the EU and its intentions. The Euro Peon Union. Not even the anti-Elitist loons trust the common man with his own destiny even after the level of shite they’re circus masters have dumped upon everybodies plate.
Supper time bovine consumers, its more of the same designed in the U.S.A destroyed elsewhere effect.
the media have betrayed all the peoples have to pay along with the political pigs highest price, the TV should be destroyed immediately join and talk among the people the truth will win deception
The scenario that we might face, makes the iron curtain look like a playground.
Those fuckers fucked you and eventually us all very good…
´National Security Alert – Sensitive Information´
Please watch and spread.
Possible legal proceedings may ensue from the evidence shown in this video.
it’s the freemarket’s fault for giving unlimited control banks second the feds and the other banks were not charging low interest rates they were charging too high of interest rates on subprime loans in order to make money off people who couldnt pay them so they would built up interest… the only way to prevent this kindov shit is socialist reform
this video is pure media diversion
this is just some procapalist profreemarket shark who wants to divert your attention from the real matter
Get your guns ready people its gonna get ugly in the next 3 years.
At least there are some who are fighting.
all lies the illuminati or freemasons group used the presidents as a puppet and used them to make prices go up so that it will make the middle class greedy just to get gas but therefore that plan failed
Oil?
If you'll email me your address, I'll mail you a shirt.
Because Jews own the banks banks control the money.
Who's the moron who said there is a large Jewish population in the US, less than 5% of this nation identify themselves as Jewish. There are more Filipinos in this nation than Jews why don't we pander to the Filipino vote
We're more entertaining?
In politics, a chief of staff is the primary aide to a political leader or position.
The White House Chief of Staff is the highest-ranking member of the Executive Office of the President of the United States and a senior aide to the President.
The duties of the White House Chief of Staff vary greatly from one administration to another. However, he/she is responsible for overseeing the actions of the White House staff, managing the President's schedule, and deciding who is allowed to meet with the President. Because of these duties, the Chief of Staff has at various times been dubbed "The Gatekeeper" and "The co-President".
Any country is passing from democracy to comunism. Socialist presidents are beeing elected but any of them is ending with democracy. Chávez was reelected president of Venezuela in a world-wide recognized election. Including the United States recognized the Venezuelan election as beeing democratic. And is too soon to say that Latin America is turning to socialism, those leaders were elected only a few years ago, many presidents in Latin America are still right-wing. 10 years ago almost all presidents of Latin America were from the right-wing. Things change, today is the socialist wave, tomorrow may be another wave. And the US don't has the moral right to care about Latin America, why do you care so much with us? Leave us alone. Anti-Americanism is the main fuel of leftism in Latin America.
The Republicans are the conservatives. The Democrats are the liberals. Actually about 40% of the electorate here considers themselves Independent and these are the voters who will decide the election. Some states do not require you to declare a party affiliation. In those states all registered voters can vote for any candidate of either party. Some states have "closed primaries" which means you must be a registered Republican or Democrat and you can only vote for the slate of candidates in the party of your registry. The "closed primary" states have this rule supposedly because some voters of another party would deliberately try to get a weak candidate of another party to win the primary.
Because the vast majority of Yahoo answers participants are American. When there aren't enough questions about foreign politics, more American politics questions appear.
elephant- republican party
donkey- democratic party