Colonel Linas Idzelis, head of Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union

Lithuania is home to a unique paramilitary organization, the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union, also referred to as Šauliai, which is supported by the national government. Established in 1919, it is aimed to train citizens in peacetime for armed and civil resistance, as well as to support state institutions with volunteers during national emergencies. During martial law, its armed formations fall under the direct command of the Lithuanian Armed Forces.

The LRU enrolls its youngest members from the age of 11 years before offering them to take oath at 18 years of age. The current commander of the LRU, Colonel Linas Idzelis, a professional soldier who had been in service since 1992, got the post in 2023 after being nominated by the country’s prime minister.

Ukrinform spoke with Colonel Idzelis as Russian aggression against Ukraine and the latest geopolitical shifts that force Europe to take up more responsibility for its own defense put Lithuania, along with the other Baltic States, in a challenging situation, having Russia as their immediate neighbor. The conversation touched upon EU defense readiness, transatlantic relations, the perception of threats by civilians in Europe, lessons to be learned from Ukraine to make Europe stronger and more resilient, as well as the history of the organization Colonel Idzelis leads.

IF WE LOSE UKRAINE, IT’S GOING TO BE THE END OF STORY FOR EUROPE

- Now Europe is reassessing its defense readiness as transatlantic ties are now being under stress. But not everywhere in the EU the threat of potential military contingencies is perceived by society the same way. What is the situation like in Lithuania?

- All the time feel that we live close to a volcano. Russia is not some new emerging threat for the Lithuanian nation. Once we started losing our territories in the 15th century, we understood that we have only one coercive enemy, which is Russia. I can’t say that 100% of our people are ready for contingencies. Some people neglect these things, also because not everybody is a patriot. We actually have some Russian supporters, but they are of course a minority.

Now, we are coming back to history because Lithuania has been a nation of warriors. Throughout the time, we’ve helped the Europeans survive. We saved Europe against the Mongol Tatar horde. One day the horde might show up again, I mean the Russians, who are now fighting with Ukrainians.

This is a new type of war because in the past, we had economical wars, ideological wars, against fascism against communism, and this is now a holy war, a war of survival. If we lose Ukraine, there's going to be end of story for Europe. What’s left of Ukrainians would be forcefully drafted into the Russian military and that force would proceed to Europe, which would entail disastrous scenarios. That’s why it’s so important now to help Ukraine.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia first attacked Chechnia, then Georgia, and even back then it was clear that Ukraine would be next, and then the fourth target would be the Baltic States.

That's why lots of Lithuanians are so keen to help Ukrainians, donating, transferring different kinds of equipment. At the same time, those in Europe who had not had experience of facing the Russian threat simply don’t understand how dangerous it is. Russians have a long-term strategy, they know what they want to achieve in the long run. I see that China also has a strategy, and also the United States is also exploring its own new strategy because the old world has already collapsed. Meanwhile, I don’t see any long-term strategy in Europe, which makes the current historical period very dangerous for the continent.

LITHUANIA HAS BEEN PREPARING FOR FOUR SCENARIOS OF RUSSIAN AGGRESSION

- How would you assess a threat of actual Russian invasion of the Baltic states in the near future? NATO secretary general Mark Rutte said NATO’s eastern flank may face Russian aggression as soon as in the next few years.

- When the Soviet Union collapsed, in Lithuania, we exercised four scenarios of how Russia might overpower the Baltic States, maybe in the conjunction with the Belarus forces because in the case of Russia’s war against NATO Belarus wouldn’t be able to stay aside. It would have to be involved in some way.

The first scenario is hybrid war, as we saw in 2014 when Redut and Wagner militants emerged, supported by GRU and spetsnaz, wearing uniforms without insignia. But that incursion had been preceded by a huge information campaign and cyber attacks. So the invasion was just a continuation of those initial hybrid actions. Lots of lessons have been learned from Ukraine since then, and now the West is ready for such kind of a scenario. In Lithuania, many older military officers, colonels, understood this type of scenario as they had studied from Russian textbooks back in the day. And in Russian books, the invasion is just the last phase, before which you have done your homework... Russians always do that, and now with Telegram and other tools, it’s easy for them to hire someone for a few hundreds of euros to smuggle something, to set a factory on fire, or vandalize a monument. Hybrid warfare is already targeting the entire Europe, of which European governments are well aware.

The second scenario we studied during exercises was the change of the local population’s mindset through the reflection control operations. The endgame for this scenario is ensuring that when the tanks roll in, they are met with flowers, not grenade launchers.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, everybody knew the Russian language, watched Russian movies, and among our military many would listen to Russian music, like Lube… Then, we understood that we're doing the wrong thing, but it was perhaps too late. Some people in Lithuania still don’t speak English, and Russian content is easily accessible via YouTube and other platforms, and it’s free – even though Lithuania has banned Russian TV channels. So a small share of Lithuanians have been poisoned by that Russian content to the extent that there’s simply no strong “antibiotics” to help them.

Basically, all it takes is time, for the younger generation to replace those who can’t be helped. It’s interesting that, despite the fact that we have a Russian ethnic minority in Lithuania, the most “vatniki” are among ethnic Lithuanians who have been brainwashed too much.

The good thing for Lithuania is that Russian sympathizers don’t live densely in some particular area so the Donbas scenario is unlikely.

The third scenario is to deny access to oil and gas. The Russians already closed the pipeline in 1997, and we realized it was a pre-planned attack against our country. That's why we decided to be energy-independent. We disconnected from Russian electricity, gas, and oil. Unfortunately, as it was clearly set out by Edward Lucas in his book, some European countries are so dependent on Russian hyrdocarbons that it’s easy for Moscow to conduct influence operations and blackmail governments.

The fourth scenario is a heist attack. For example, a few thousand Russians military servicemen wearing civilian clothes, driving civilian vehicles during the night penetrating Lithuania’s border. That would be accompanied by some 400 Shaheds, cruise and ballistic missiles flying in at five o'clock in the morning.

- Is Europe ready for the fourth scenario?

- This is a very dangerous option as I don’t think any European country would be ready for 500 incoming drones and missiles targeting power plants, hospitals, military units and headquarters, parliament buildings or presidential palaces to eliminate all high value targets. This would be followed or accompanied by a simultaneous airborne operation and then a conventional attack involving tanks and APCs.

But this would be a completely different scenario from what we saw in Ukraine, because in Ukraine, the Russian army, which many thought was the world’s second-strongest, suffered losses on the move as they underestimated Ukraine’s resistance due to wrong intel. We also know that this was due to the fact that the huge amount of money spent on influence operations in Ukraine as part of preparations for the invasion was simply stolen by their puppets in the country.

Purely from a military standpoint, the invasion involving less than 200,000 troops along multiple advance avenues was madness but still, the Russians went for it, which turned out to be a big mistake.

MOSFILM AGAINST HOLLYWOOD IN TERMS OF WARFARE

- Do you think Europe could in such case engage Ukraine’s military assistance given the battle-tested experience of Ukrainian troops, even before allowing Ukraine to join the EU?

- It’s only the Ukrainian military who know how to really fight the Russians, how to defend against professional units like the Rubicon drone operators. Defending Europe without Ukrainian troops would be very difficult. It would be a huge challenge. I think sooner or later everybody understands that without battle-proven Ukrainian army, there’s no future for Europe. I see that some countries are preparing for a Second World War type of conflict, which is wrong.

There are two schools of warfare – one I call “Mosfilm” and another is “Hollywood”. Mosfilm is about sending waves of infantry to the war grinder to die and families keep receiving death notices and perhaps a posthumous medal. But I prefer Hollywood – with extensive minefields and drone operators deployed far from the line of contact. And I think the future belongs to this Western school, with further robotization, dronization of warfare. After all, the West is rich so it can afford it. What’s still missing is the military industrial capacities, but since we now have increased defense budgets, it’s just a matter of time.

Europe needs to move from constant discussion to action. Since the large-scale invasion, there’s been discussions. Only when Donald Trump came to power did Europeans start feeling anxious, investing more into defense. There are now many governmental pledges, orders to military factories, new production lines are being built, and I think they will take some know-how from Ukraine, including deep and mid-strike drones, as well as interceptors against modernized drones, which now fly at higher speeds and higher altitudes, mash technology, cameras installed, better e-warfare resistance, etc. So Europe has lots of homework to do.

I often go to Ukraine, visit various headquarters, and I often see Brits there. I understand that the Brits are really preparing and taking things very seriously. I’m no judge to assess readiness in European countries but definitely, it’s best if someone starts real transformation and serves as an example for others, leading the way.

The West needs to have a plan to bury all Russian invaders, 100 percent of them.

- We’re seeing NATO unity being under stress, maybe even cracking in the wake of the latest jabs from the US toward European allies for not being ready to support the war effort in Iran. We’re seeing the calls for European defense autonomy, promoted by Commissioner for Defense Andrius Kubilius. But is the pace of achieving defense autonomy and defense-related decision-making in Europe fast enough?

- We need to go back to basics when we think about NATO. The alliance was conceived around the idea of the US military guarantees to Europe. Before WW2, Europeans would often fight each other – France against Germany, France against the UK, and so on… After WW2, we’ve had the United States military presence, a Marshall plan to rebuild the Europe, and a nuclear umbrella. Russia has never been afraid of Europe. What they really feared was this “crazy cowboy” with a nuclear capability where the outcome of a potential standoff could be total Armageddon.

As for the current situation of NATO, I wouldn’t assume that there’s cracking among the NATO military. Everything is business as usual, all the planning is ongoing, exercises are underway, which is a very good signal. As we are training our battalions within the LRU, the Americans stationed in Lithuania remain very helpful, they keep inviting us to exercises every second weekend.

ABSENSE OF CONSCIPTION IN MANY EUROPEAN COUNTRIES LEADS TO LACK OF RESERVES

- Is the US push for European allies to be more independent working?

- I recall that in my thesis 10 years ago, when Lithuania was spending around 1 percent for defense, I wrote that we need to achieve least a 2 percent NATO benchmark in the nearest future. My supervisor, a British dean, told me it was rubbish. He stressed that Lithuania needs at least five or even seven percent. That's because you need to create an army and also to arm it. You can’t have a hollow structure. If there’s a unit on paper which is not equipped, it’s basically a fake unit. This was very bluntly conveyed to Europeans by the US Department of Defense in 2011 when they already said America is not going to send its soldiers to die in Europe. During one conference, a top DoD official started pointing at particular countries in Europe, recalling that one of them during Cold War used to have four mechanized corps, and now they are not capable of even forming a division. Confronting another European ally, the official reminded that they used to have a thousand tanks, and now they have zero.

Problems remain. Europe needs to produce much more weapons. It needs much bigger manpower reserves. Looking at the war raging in Ukraine, Russia has probably already lost three full armies there, and of course, the Ukrainian losses are also significant. And meanwhile, there’s basically no conscription across Europe. It means there are no reserves for the second, or third wave of enemy assault. Not everywhere the problems with achieving readiness are as acute. Finland, for example, is preparing for potential conflict much better than many.

Ukraine is a very good example of rebuilding its defense industry. While Russia is pretty much trying to improve the two directions of drone production – Geran and Molnia – Ukraine is already producing a huge palette. I don’t know any other country that would produce as many kinds of different military assets as Ukraine.

- So what’s the way to go for Europe?

- If we are preparing to fight Russians, the future of European defense is about integrating the Ukrainian defense industry and the Ukrainian military into the overall formation.

- Do you think NATO is doing enough to integrate Ukraine’s battlefield experience into its combat protocols, such as air defense tactics?

- I don't know about other countries but at least in Lithuania, we are trying to copy some things, to produce something, and also to set up mobile air defense teams. In some countries, I see tangible actions in this regard. Air defense is a domain where Europe indeed requires lots of improvements, and again we’re returning to the need to boost defense industry. Governments need to talk to defense companies. We cannot hit a 20,000 euro drone with a missile that costs up to 3 million. This way, stocks would be depleted too fast, and there will be nowhere to buy more. And I’m now talking only about the first wave of defense, let alone the second or third. Even if you have 200,000 reservists for the second wave of defense, you still need to equip them properly, not in line with WW2 standards, which is rifles and helmets.

It’s 2026, and we need a different kind of solutions. Stocks of older weapons might have helped Ukraine initially, but for a small country like us, this would mean that we lose the entire nation if we don’t have a more modern army and if we fail to fight using our brain.

THOSE WILLING TO JOIN LRU ARE ASKED THREE QUESTIONS

- It’s interesting also to talk about your unique organization, how it's integrated with the Ministry of Defense, how it’s supported by government, helping to improve the country’s overall defense preparedness. Do you think the experience of your organization could be useful for other European countries?

- Excellent question. I see that lots of countries are a bit jealous and that they want to have similar organizations. But it's not so easy to set them up. We have good traditions because we are an old organization. It was created in 1919, just after WW1, when we still had the German and Russian troops, who were raping, killing, and looting. A decision was made to create an organization to put all the partisans under a single umbrella in order to keep the situation under control. In the period between the two world wars, the organization was responsible for training the society for partisan war. The simple ambition was that every man and woman would be capable to handle a rifle. Once we regained independence, we had two National Guards – a Federal National Guard, which is like Ukraine’s National Guard, and us – the State National Guard. The difference is that we cannot be deployed abroad, such as in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Kosovo. Those who are deployed get paid as professional soldiers.

In turn, our members are really volunteers. This resembles formations set up after the Maidan when people would join units such as the Aidar and so on, simply willing to give something to their country.

When new people are joining our organization, we ask the following questions: Are you are a patriot of Lithuania? Are you ready to kill and die for your country? If the answer is no, then it’s an immediate goodbye. Also we ask whether they have time to attend exercises. If you want to be ready, you have to gain skills so you need basic training. We joke that we’re SAS – because we train on “Saturday and Sunday”, or in evening time.

People donate to LRU, and we set up our own shooting ranges and training areas. We are responsible including for training the general public in terms of unarmed, civil-based resistance, how to provide assistance to the military.

And also, we run patriotic courses at school as early as in the 7th grade. Now there’s been an order from the Defense Ministry that we start as early as grade 5. We have a cadet corps in our organization, where cadets can join from the age of 11. We copied the system from Brits and improved it.

After they turn 18, we start training them in some soldiering things. So by the time they are adults, if they choose to join police, military, or border guards, they have already been prepared. They can become instructors also. They are trained to be leaders. Now it’s a school holiday period, and if you go to our regiments, you will see many youngsters already training in specialized units, like medical, drone, rescue, or cyber defense. There’s been a good vibe created around these courses, especially in the big cities. Not so much in the country side where the main problem is that the population is shrinking. We are a shrinking country, like many in Europe, and the demographic problem also needs to be addressed. It keeps killing us, although it’s doing so softer than any other enemy.

WE NEED TO LEARN FROM UKRAINE AND TO SMELL THE WAR

- Since you strongly cooperate with the Ukrainian military, what are the main areas of your interaction?

- We are cooperating with UAV forces, learning from them. Where else can we learn? Of course, you can easily organize a tank driver course if you approach a German defense attache for help. But where can you learn how a drone battalion staff should operate? This can be done only on the front line. You have to be there, watching the actual battalion work. So we send to Ukraine our riflemen who can potentially take up leadership positions, like company commanders, deputy company commanders, platoon leaders, potential battalion commanders, and chief of staff. So they ask questions to Ukrainian officers and take notes.

We’re learning from Ukrainians on how they adapt to the changing enemy tactics. We’re studying how to fight against fiberoptic drones, how to protect strategic sites. We need to smell war and understand how to fight. It won’t help if we just go to Kyiv, shake hands, and exchange symbolic gifts. We need to go all the way to the frontline, although it’s risky of course.

We’re also cooperating with Ukraine’s special forces but I can’t go into any details of that work.

I travel to Ukraine every three months, speaking with colonels, lieutenants. I visit units, I witness various operations to see the reality – how they deal with drones, infantry, or artillery – and then I digest this data and form my own perception. That's because the principles of defending a big country and a small country are completely different. We can’t just copy-paste the Ukrainian experience because Lithuania has no strategic depth. That's why we cannot lose any area. If we do, it will be very difficult to dislodge the enemy and to regain our positions.

RUSSIA SEEKS TO RESTORE THE SOVIET UNION

- It feels you’re not expecting peace anytime soon. How do you think is it possible to prevent Russia from advancing further and threatening Europe?

- Russia has always had its ups and downs. There are periods when they are weaker, including after revolutions or other internal turbulences. In such periods, there’s time for us to prepare better. But that preparation must be real, without neglection.

I’m really afraid that, if the war in Ukraine stops, military budgets in Europe will also be reduced. So a lot depends on politicians.

As long as Ukraine is fighting, I think that there is no conventional threat for Europe because Russia has no capability to fight simultaneously in several front lines. What is left now close to us is just unit protection, and some units are even closed – so, no soldiers and no equipment. Everything is in Ukraine.

I should also say that in the ongoing war, FPV drones have become a game changer. I believe it was a very wise decision to set up the unmanned systems forces in Ukraine. If it wasn’t for them, the Russians would have already overpowered Ukraine. It feels like in conventional warfare, they are stronger. If they can’t send tanks somewhere, they will send small infantry groups, and they will keep sending more and more, and they will eventually find the weak spots, some vulnerabilities. Also, the Russians are learning. This is a completely different Russian military thinking. At the operational and strategical levels, they’ve learned a lot. Also, they are consistent in their policy. They want to firstly destroy Ukraine and then to keep going, to restore the Soviet Union. Everything started from Belarus, and now they are trying to digest Ukraine. They can’t restore the Soviet Union without Ukraine.

I'm not anticipating any kind of good scenarios for the future. Russians will keep going, even if some pause takes place at some point. The West needs to understand this and to keep helping you weaken Russia. If we have deep strike capabilities and if we are capable of jointly targeting all their oil refineries, factories producing military equipment, arms storages, strategic airfields, and other sites – just strike. Strike and destroy. At least, Russia will need some time to rebuild. I don't see any other option.

Ievgen Matiushenko, Brussels – Vilnius

Photos provided by the Lithuanian Riflemen's Union