Alexey Chepa, the First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma International Relations Committee, dismissed as absurd the comments by Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis suggesting that Russia might launch an attack on NATO. In an interview with Bant.Ru, Chepa argued that such claims do not withstand practical or strategic scrutiny. He insisted that Moscow has never pursued a military campaign against NATO and that the scenario Landsbergis described is not technically feasible. According to the lawmaker, Russia could, in theory, inflict damage on NATO, but he emphasized that achieving such an objective has never been a stated goal of Moscow. He also criticized Western narratives about a Russian assault on the alliance, labeling them as misinformed or sensationalist. [citation]
Earlier, Landsbergis had publicly floated the possibility that Russia could threaten or confront NATO, prompting a strong rebuttal. He described Russia as a neighbor with aggressive aims and urged Europe to prepare for potential provocations from Moscow. Landsbergis warned that not all European regions could be counted on to face such threats, noting a broad geographic spread of risk that would require a coordinated and proactive defense response across the continent. [citation]
In the same vein, Landsbergis pressed Europe to reassess its security posture and consider concrete measures to assist Ukraine amid ongoing tensions. He underscored the urgency of assessing threats, strengthening deterrence, and fostering unity among European Union and NATO members to support Kyiv while avoiding complacency in the face of regional instability. [citation]
Experts and policymakers watching the region note that the exchange highlights a broader debate about strategic risk, alliance resilience, and the balance between deterrence and diplomacy. The Russian military posture, coupled with Western explanations of potential threats, continues to shape discussions about defense budgets, joint exercises, and the durability of alliance commitments in North America and Europe. Analysts caution that rhetoric from senior officials on either side can influence public perception and policy, underscoring the need for measured, fact-based discourse in the public arena. [citation]
Within Canada and the United States, security professionals emphasize maintaining readiness without escalating rhetoric. They advocate clear communication about deterrence strategies, ongoing alliance reforms, and continued support for Ukraine’s sovereignty. The conversation between Russian and Baltic officials serves as a reminder of the volatile security environment in which North American and European partners operate, prompting careful assessment of threats, contingency planning, and diplomatic channels intended to prevent misinterpretation or miscalculation during moments of high tension. [citation]