VU Rector Prof. Rimvydas Petrauskas. We Cannot Live Wrapped up in a Discourse of Constant Crisis

Statehood does not begin in empty time and space and has no clear reference point in the future. By choosing the year 2050 for the State Progress Strategy, we aim to use our reason and imagination and predict the statehood development directions within a manageable time horizon as well as manage our hopeful or anxious guesses within strategies. Considering the history and present of other states, Lithuanian statehood is both a typical and an interesting phenomenon with specific problems.

At this point in the development of the State Progress Strategy 2050, I will try to draw certain outlines based on the past, present, and the already discussed and formulated future scenarios. Although the title of the text describes the time vector, discussing space is no less important. How do we understand our geographical position on the map of Europe and the world?

One. Lithuania’s statehood is given an impetus by the integration line. The medieval Lithuanian state was completed by Mindaugas accepting the crown offered by the Christian world as an invitation to join the family of the then Christian monarchies, realizing that it was an opportunity to consolidate his power within the country, and at the same time to protect and legitimize it at an international level. The most successful time for Lithuania’s development and expansion was at the times when it gained the greatest integration momentum. The events of the last few decades, or perhaps even the last few months, have shown that only active participation in European policy-making can strengthen statehood.

Two. Unions are a response to geopolitical challenges and an instrument for solving domestic policy problems. Federalism is not a sign of the weakening of states but of their maturity and ability to adapt to a changing international environment. Throughout its history, Lithuania has long existed as a part of various political unions, and this experience allows us to project union-belonging Lithuania’s future without major fears and mythologies.

Three. Lithuania, like the wider region, still has a strong historical mythologizing of autocratic rule (“a longing for a new leader”). Threatening future scenarios herald the possibility of the strengthening of autocratic traits. Strengthening democratic traditions and habits should be the answer to this real challenge. Protecting Power may be an attractive or safe solution for the majority of the population, but in the long term, attempts to create such systems led to the weakening of states. Therefore, a state like that is not a goal but a threat to the sustainability of the political community.

Four. What have we historically realized in the memory of statehood from the time of Mindaugas until now? At all times, the political challenge is the consolidation of society. Mindaugas consolidated the people through armies, and Gediminas expanded the state by sharing sovereignty with the local Ruthenian elites, during the Statutes, consolidation was sought by expanding the concept of a political nation within the framework of the entire noble class. Later, Lithuania missed the opportunity to recognize the townspeople as participants in the political community, and thus it was only in the interwar period that new functional communities, horizontal networks of social groups that value initiative and participate in the decision-making process had to be created. I probably do not have to elaborate on how much of that experience was lost during the Soviet era and called for a new revival at the end of the 20th century. Even in the 21st century, the lack of this experience becomes a nuisance.

Five. What are we recording now and what is important for the future? The horizontalization of government, the public’s desire to get involved, the need for publicity, the importance of data management and use, the global nature of problems and solutions, and the influence of international organizations. And, of course, the meaning of education in the broadest sense - it is not for nothing that education has become the comparative criterion of drawn future scenarios - we agreed that through its development we can predict where the state’s development within the coming decades. 

Six. One of the greatest obstacles in Lithuania’s development is the established code of reticence, even though it was the openness that historically gave Lithuania the opportunity for change and impetus. The very first clear and conceptual vision of Lithuania, Gediminas’s letters, shows how the pagan-ruled country is trying to find a place among the Christian states, clearly expressing its position and values, initiating a broad diplomatic campaign and, finally, inviting new people from essentially all social groups to stimulate the country’s economic development. It is not only demographic problems (although they also contribute) that call for integration policy to become one of the priorities. Perhaps we need to talk not so much about “attracting talents” but about Lithuania as a place where creative people would like to come and stay, seeing the opportunities here and recognizing a functional integration mechanism. Instead of being a nation morbidly concerned with the security of its identity, we must become a self-confident community that strives to give back to the world because that is the only way we can hope to be interesting and needed, without wasting energy and resources on trying to prevent the inevitable change, preserving identity and similar processes focused on meaningless nostalgia.

Seven. As for security, Lithuania must become a deterrent (let’s not be afraid of this somewhat harsh word) state. I propose giving deterrence a positive connotation and interpreting it as a strong, distinctive, and inclusive identity. It is about time we create new narratives from the security perspective. Instead of talking about the “difficult-to-defend Suwałki Gap,” let’s talk about the “Visaginas Spike”, the Western world’s concerted response to authoritarian regimes.

Eight. Perhaps the most important thing is to avoid the possibility of stagnation present in future development scenarios. The status quo is a convenient and easy-to-sell scenario. As the sarcastic classicist, Mark Twain said: I’m in favor of progress; it’s change I don’t like. The recent past has shown how quickly people get used to cheap raw materials and put up with the development of authoritarian regimes in the name of real enrichment and a supposedly peaceful state. Later comes the awakening and realization of how many opportunities were missed.

From the point of view of European history, the development of Lithuania obviously stalled for more than a century after the 17th century Flood - stagnation in the social and legal system and the economy went hand in hand with the lack of a more conceptual reflection of the internal and external situation. Therefore, let’s take the current crises and heated discussions as an opportunity for renewal. As in Lithuania, let’s consider why education, innovation, migration, etc. policies have stagnated for several decades. As the European Union, let’s contribute by encouraging a new debate on the future and structure of the Union. The European Union must commit itself not only to geographical expansion but also to internal transformation. Without a new integrative impetus and new structures, the Union can only act reactively and with inevitable delays. The solution to the current problems lies in strengthening the European Union ties and a new commitment to European identity and democracy. Europe needs a “pledge of mutual commitment” that covers not only political, financial, health, and climate protection but also culture and education, and, therefore, identity.

Nine. So, what is Lithuania’s situation and what is it going to turn out to be? We can probably make peace with the fact that it will remain a periphery, a periphery state, the border of the European Union. To function in this situation, we must remind ourselves that being a periphery does not equal standing on the edge of the abyss. It is rather an opportunity for change, reflection, and the need to adapt and respond. We must focus our thoughts on exploring this situation, and make it our principle of action. If we look at the situation of Vilnius more broadly in the projection of the intersection of West and East, from the periphery it becomes a center. A center of knowledge, competencies, and meetings. Periphery is not in a military sense but an area of healthy and productive intellectual tensions.

Ten. Returning to the scenarios, the main challenge facing the actually very near 2050s is moving from a scenario that presents a picture of stagnant problems that cannot be solved due to a lack of political and civic will and that are becoming increasingly old, where we basically are right now (the education system has been undergoing endless reforms for several decades; the already low funding for science distributed among many universities and research institutes is fighting for survival, not for the development of science and innovation; the lifelong learning system is poorly established; a lack of leadership and competent employees in state institutions, which significantly reduces the opportunities for generating new ideas; the decision-making process is not based on knowledge, and evidence-based arguments but on ideology and party interests; Lithuania’s economy is stagnating, relying on cheap labor and scarce local resources, talents are emigrating; the economy is “trapped” inside the medium-income, short value chains dominate, businesses creating high added value are decreasing, the country’s competitiveness in international markets is weakening; the demographic situation is steadily deteriorating, the country is not favorable for newcomers; culture is seen as a means of preserving ethnic identity; the healthcare system is focused on treatment, not prevention, etc.), to a more progressive one (individualized inclusive education for pupils/students of all abilities; creative solutions to emerging challenges - in the world of identity, social cohesion, networking, and competitiveness; a favorable natural and social climate making the country an attractive place to live, etc.).

If we agree on this, then we give the most important role in the state’s progress to education, a modern, educated, (self)critical, and mobile society, we understand that the role of universities is pivotal. They provide and support the circulation of ideas in society via intellectual leadership and opinion formation. It’s a place where we raise and discuss issues that are currently often limited to the form of political slogans.

Next year, we are celebrating Vilnius’s 700th anniversary. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to not only forecast but also to start implementing future-oriented, long-term, bold decisions. How can we demonstrate the potential of Vilnius and all of Lithuania on an international scale? Is the foreign media going to continue portraying us as a threat zone and scare tourists and students away or, on the contrary, are we going to present ourselves as a place of connections and dialogue? A place where scientific research gives rise to top-level technologies and business, a place where research on totalitarianism, gives rise to proposals for democracies, and a place where society is ready to comprehensively defend democracy.

We are in a critical geopolitical situation. On the other hand, since February this year, the lines of future scenarios have become much clearer. Considering and discussing the future and the desired development trajectories, let us see the potential for fulfillment. It is crucial to timely make political decisions and enable social processes, the realization of which will really take several decades. We cannot live in the discourse of constant crisis, let’s better talk about a new start, reflecting on the experiences gained. The year 2050 is not that far away. Technology will change, but it will not dominate a life where the usual categories of the conditions humans will continue to prevail. However, some countries will develop more successfully, others will inevitably fall behind. Therefore, if we do not want to see the sunset of the state, let’s invest in Sunrise.

Introductory speech at the meeting of the State Progress Council, 14/07/2022