Lithuania is considering removing a constitutional provision that prohibits the deployment of weapons of mass destruction on its territory, following remarks by the country’s incoming prime minister who argued the restriction limits the country’s ability to fully benefit from NATO’s defence capabilities.“The geopolitical situation is getting worse. Our constitution was written when geopolitical circumstances were totally different,” President Gitanas Nausėda said on Thursday after meeting with top officials and parliamentary faction leaders. Nausėda confirmed that nearly all parliamentary faction leaders agree the ban is outdated and should be scrapped.Nausėda mentioned that there were no immediate plans to store nuclear weapons in Lithuania, but that removing the provision would ensure the country was not constrained if security circumstances changed in the future. “It would be truly regrettable if we were to become a weak link or a ‘gray zone’ within NATO itself,” he said.Prime Minister-designate Mindaugas Sinkevičius said the constitutional restriction should be removed rather than revised, according to Lithuanian national television and radio, LRT . “It seems to me that, politically, it would be more appropriate simply to remove this article, because the constitutions of our neighboring countries say nothing on this issue,” he told parliamentary faction members.Defence Minister Robertas Kaunas has backed the proposal, saying Lithuania is “practically the only country in NATO that prohibits nuclear weapons,” which “does not allow us to fully utilise the alliance’s defence potential.”The debate comes after Finland lifted its own prohibition on nuclear weapons deployment, and as NATO maintains nuclear forces “both for defence and for deterrence,” Kaunas noted. The discussion has gained momentum following President Gitanas Nausėda’s veto in May of legislation that would have permitted vessels carrying nuclear weapons to enter Lithuanian territorial waters.
Analysts argue nuclear deterrence is necessary
The proposal has sparked debate over whether nuclear weapons would make Lithuania safer or turn it into a priority target. Analysts argue that Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and its nuclear blackmail have fundamentally changed the security calculus for countries along Russia’s border.“Before the war in Ukraine, the main argument of opponents of firm deterrence was that Russia should not be provoked,” one analyst wrote. “But the Kremlin made it clear that it needs no provocation.”The analyst noted that Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova did not threaten Moscow, yet “that did not save them from Russian aggression.” The question, he argued, is not whether Lithuania would become a target if nuclear weapons appear on its territory, but whether “the absence of those weapons ever provably made Lithuania and its neighbors safer.”“We should stop being preoccupied with how to avoid irritating Moscow. Our focus should be on ensuring that the rulers in the Kremlin never decide to test how ready we are to defend ourselves.”