Can the US still deter Russia? Lithuania navigates an uneasy alliance

As US President Donald Trump’s administration takes steps that critics say strengthen Russia, American troops are gradually returning to Lithuania, a frontline NATO ally seeking a permanent US military presence as a deterrent against Moscow.

The contrasting developments have given Lithuanian leaders a cognitive dissonance. Washington’s reported deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin over diesel fuel, pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and revelations of Russian-American discussions about future energy deals have raised questions about US policy toward the Kremlin. At the same time, a senior American NATO commander has outlined how the alliance would respond to a possible Russian attack, including strikes against targets on Russian territory.

A difficult balancing act

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump confronted Zelensky in New York several weeks ago, questioning why Ukraine was attacking Russian oil facilities.

As Ukraine appeared to gain momentum in its campaign against Russian targets, Trump blamed Kyiv for high diesel prices, reached an agreement with Moscow, eased sanctions and purchased some Russian diesel fuel. Zelensky has also said that the United States had temporarily suspended intelligence sharing with Ukraine.

Lithuanian President Gitanas Nausėda described the diesel agreement as “a bad day”.

Prime Minister Mindaugas Sinkevičius also criticized US agreements with Russia, while thanking Washington for resuming the rotation of American troops in Lithuania.

For Vilnius, the challenge is to maintain support for Ukraine without directly entering a dispute with the Trump administration, said Tomas Janeliūnas, a professor at Vilnius University’s Institute of International Relations and Political Science.

“Lithuania is not abandoning its support for Ukraine. We understand what it needs and want the Americans to support Ukraine as much as possible,” Janeliūnas said. But Lithuanian politicians do not want to become directly involved in the dispute, he added, seeing little practical benefit in doing so.

Deividas Matulionis, the president’s chief national security adviser, said the best approach for now was to wait and see. Lithuania has already presented Washington with a proposal for a permanent US military presence.

“We could do everything necessary to accommodate 1,500 to 2,000 permanently deployed American troops,” Matulionis said. Some infrastructure might need to be prepared, he added, but all political parties, both in government and in opposition, would support such a decision.

Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys dismissed suggestions that Lithuania’s criticism of Washington’s dealings with Moscow could jeopardise the troop deployment.

“We should not assume that one issue is held hostage by another,” Budrys said. Disagreements over tariffs, trade and security, including differences over Greenland, had ultimately been resolved, he noted.

Can Washington still guarantee deterrence?

Lithuania’s dilemma is particularly acute because Ukraine is fighting Russia, which Vilnius considers its greatest adversary, while the United States remains the country’s principal security guarantor.

The Kremlin has long been accused of efforts to undermine NATO unity. But doubts arising from Washington itself pose a different challenge, as Trump’s rhetoric toward NATO and his approach to Ukraine raise questions about the reliability of US commitments.

Janeliūnas said the possibility of a secret military understanding between Trump and Putin could not be ruled out entirely, although he considered it unlikely.

“The reaction would be explosive,” he said.

NATO’s agreed defence plans and the powers of the alliance’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, or SACEUR, provide a significant deterrent, Janeliūnas said. The commander can take certain actions before a political decision is made to invoke NATO’s Article 5 collective defence clause.

Confidence in the alliance has also been reinforced by US Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s top commander in Europe, who has publicly outlined how NATO would respond to Russian aggression.

Retired Col. Vaidotas Malinionis said the American military presence remained essential, but Lithuania could not rely on it alone.

“We also have other layers – the German brigade, the participation of other NATO countries on our territory, and, of course, our national capabilities, civil security and civil defence,” he said. “We need to increase our resilience.”

Asked whether he would put more trust in Grynkewich or Trump, Malinionis replied: “As a retired military officer, I always trust the military.”

Allied troops as a deterrent

American troops returning to Lithuania will be housed in newly built barracks at the Gen. Silvestras Žukauskas military training area. They will join Lithuanian forces and an expanding German military presence.

Lithuania is also awaiting the arrival of German tanks, while the first crews are already training on German-made Leopard tanks.

Brig. Gen. Nerijus Stankevičius, commander of the Lithuanian army’s land forces, said the returning US troops were coming not simply to train but to contribute to deterrence.

An adversary planning an attack would have to account for Lithuanian troops as well as several battalions of allied forces, he said. That would make any operation substantially more difficult and harder to carry out without detection.

“The adversary’s task becomes much more complicated, and that is deterrence,” Stankevičius said.

Lithuania’s armed forces have repeatedly stressed that they would not hide behind allied troops in a war. But the presence of foreign forces would increase the costs and risks for any attacker.

Still, questions remain about whether military preparations are matched by sufficient readiness at home.

Dainius Gaižauskas, a member of the parliament’s National Security and Defence Committee, said preparedness should extend beyond the armed forces to the country’s internal security services and civil protection systems.

Gaižauskas said his party, the Farmers and Greens Union that is a junior member in the Social Democrat-led ruling coalition, had proposed reallocating part of the defence budget to internal security services, arguing that the country needed to prepare for emergencies on its own territory as well as for military attacks.

“I believe the army would do its job as planned,” Gaižauskas said. “But would we be able to cope with what happens inside the country? Could we coordinate effectively when we know we lack air defence systems and our civil warning system is not operating at 100%?”

Retired US Gen. Ben Hodges has repeatedly warned Lithuania that Russia is unlikely to be deterred simply by the amount the country spends on defence. A sign at the border announcing that Lithuania spends 5% of its GDP on the military would not, by itself, change Moscow’s calculations.

For Vilnius, the central question is whether Trump’s policies have weakened that international deterrent – and whether the presence of American troops can persuade Putin that an attack on Lithuania would carry unacceptable costs.