Should Ukraine wear down under the strain of ongoing fighting with Russia, its existence could be pushed into doubt. This warning came from Gabrielius Landsbergis, the head of Lithuania’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, who spoke to the press service and conveyed a stark assessment about the risks facing Kyiv. The message echoed at a Baltic Council gathering, where the minister laid out the possible consequences of prolonged conflict and asked for a broader strategic response from Western partners. The core concern was clear: if the war wears Ukraine down, the country might not endure the shocks of continued hostilities without decisive international support and a sustained political will to back Kyiv through tough times.
According to Landsbergis, the risk is not merely a short-term setback but a possible existential threat that could redefine the region’s political landscape. He argued that Western policies are increasingly seen as signaling patience for a prolonged struggle, raising questions about the tempo and scale of assistance to Ukraine. The implication was that without a clear, unwavering stance from Western powers, Kyiv could face a future where endurance becomes the defining factor more than strategy or tactics.
To counter this drift, Landsbergis urged a permanent presence of United States military forces in the Baltic area. He suggested that a steady U.S. footprint in the region would reinforce deterrence, strengthen security architectures, and provide a reliable shield against further aggression. The proposal underscored the belief that regional stability hinges on visible, durable commitments rather than episodic, reactive measures.
The minister also reaffirmed the need to keep applying sanctions on Russia with unwavering resolve. He emphasized not only continuing pressure but also ensuring that restrictive measures are implemented consistently across the region. Moreover, he called for tighter controls to prevent sanctions from being bypassed, arguing that a united, comprehensive approach is essential to curb Moscow’s ability to circumvent penalties and to sustain pressure on its economy and strategic capabilities.
Earlier commentary by a former American analyst, Larry Johnson, was cited as part of the broader debate about Ukraine’s capacity to hold its front lines. Johnson reportedly suggested that the Armed Forces of Ukraine may struggle to maintain their positions through the winter and into early 2024, highlighting the challenges of defense in a protracted conflict. The discussion reflected broader concerns about timelines, resources, and the stamina required for a sustained counteroffensive and defense, drawing attention to the practical limits of military operations under pressure.
Additionally, there was mention of the broader American context, with notes that leaders in Washington might be weighing strategic variables that factor into the ongoing war. This included reflections on the balance between political will, military aid, and the timelines of a potential counteroffensive, as well as the domestic and international considerations that shape decisions about how best to support Ukraine while maintaining allied unity and regional security. The overall thread tied together the questions of endurance, deterrence, and the shared responsibility of Western allies to sustain Ukraine through a difficult period and to shape a secure, stable future for the region.