The President of Lithuania has been celebrating her little victory in the form of a German-led multinational NATO battalion designed to protect the country from a horrible "Eastern threat". Surely, under the protection of such invincible warriors, Lithuanians would feel safe at once. Belgium and Netherlands are especially formidable. As recently as WWII they competed with each other in a speed capitulation. I seem to remember the first one surrendered in 18 days, the second one did in 5 days. And Luxemburg is a key force, of course.
Grybauskaite reminds that Lithuania "is an active and innovated country, and an equal member of NATO," and that it must be defended on common Alliance standards, for a long time. According to this warmongering lady, the most important partner of Lithuania is the USA (http://guardian.ng/news/eastern-nato-ally-says-clinton-trumps-trump-on-security/). Meanwhile the US presidential contender Donald Trump's statement that the Baltic nations also have to "fulfill their obligations" to America didn't sit well with her. But a Democrat "strong independent woman" has got along well with the Karate-president back when she held the office of a State Secretary. Lithuania had been participating actively in NATO international operations, trying hard to prove that it's not vermin, but a partner, at that time. Even then, Clinton was talking openly about necessity of military support of the Baltic states and Lithuania in particular.
In such situation, it becomes clear where Grybauskaite stands after her expressing confidence that American commitments to NATO, to the Baltic region will stay, regardless of the election result. Well, Mrs. Lithuanian President's efforts were successful. The Baltic region and Poland have obtained their NATO battalion groups. However are really Poles and Baltic nations feeling secure from external aggression now?
As is known, any action brings reaction. Let Mr. Stoltenberg waste his breath talking about aiming to conduct a constructive dialogue with Russia. We can interpret NATO presence near Russian border as an answer to Russian increased military activity all we want. But this position doesn't change the fact of violation of the Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the RF signed in Paris, France, in May 1997 (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_25468.htm). According to this Act NATO has pledged to avoid destabilizing increase of forces near Russian boundaries. So such deployment is enough to provoke retaliatory "defence" measures by the opposing side. Similar actions started the cold war arms race after the WWII. And now this is a perfect excuse for the further increasing of Russian military deployment at the RF western borders and growing animosity up to skirmishes at EU boundary, as consequence.
Doesn't Mrs. Grybauskaite understand where she pushes her NATO allies, while being actively engaged in developing of this tense situation? If so, then I beg my pardon, she should command at kitchen, not at the head of the European state. In this particular case, the president of Lithuania acts as an absolute saboteur framing her allies. She draws consciously into the military flair-up not only her country, but also the European Union and the North Atlantic Alliance in favour of her personal russophobia. Such war hawks as Mrs. Clinton applaud her from over the ocean. They've just been looking for a reason to destabilize this region for a long time.