| Abstract [eng] |
NATO Summit in Vilnius: did it give Lithuanian Voice more Importance? Lithuania was hosting NATO summit for the very first time in Vilnius on July 11-12, 2023. In April of 2023, Seimas adopted a resolution that marked five goals to achieve in the summit: strengthening the defense and deterrence of the Baltic region and the Eastern Flank; the need to invite Ukraine to become a NATO member state in Vilnius; helping Sweden to join the Alliance; aim to allocate at least 2 percent of NATO members' GDP to the defense; strengthening the cooperation with the countries of the Indo-Pacific region. In this master thesis the object is the diplomatic practices applied by Lithuania to achieve these goals. The aim of this study is to find out whether Lithuania, as the host of the NATO summit, had a greater impact on the decisions made than in the cases when it was not the host. It rises from a problem that the decisions of NATO must be reached in consensus and the biggest impact on that rests with the United States. The theoretical approach gives ground for the following thesis statement: being the host of the NATO summit gave Lithuania a diplomatic advantage. To accomplish the aim of the study, four steps where formulated: 1) based on practice theory, to find out what factors can lead to influence in summit formats; 2) based on theoretical assumptions, form a research model; 3) conduct qualitative research: semi-structured interviews with Lithuanian foreign policy makers from different domestic institutions; NATO officials and diplomats from abroad; 4) review other publicly available sources, clarifying the circumstances of the NATO summit in Vilnius, as much as possible, checking the answers provided by the respondents. The research comes to conclusion, that Lithuania did gain diplomatic advantage from being the host of NATO summit, but the impact on the decisions made is contested. It is reached by analyzing four cuts that arise from the research model formed, based on Practice theory: process (what was being done to achieve goals), rules (how the process is framed by the bureaucratic apparatus), site (how the geography, atmosphere and microclimate played the role), and external influence (the other actors outside NATO). The most important here being process – the role of a host meant the opportunities to negotiate in the diplomatic circles that Lithuania was not a part of before, it obliged Lithuania to be more active during the preparations for the summit, invoke new practices – but even though it provided Vilnius the advantage, it did not always lead to fruitful results. And the advantage was not a reward – it was a result of the active measures taken by Lithuanian side in order to make the summit successful. This study not only opens the backstage of the Vilnius summit, provides information that has not been public before, but allows to understand how the practices led to the outcomes of the summit – explaining how the host can accumulate power, what are the limits to it. It reveals the steps that would fade if one would only compare the aims and the results. They are important to unclose as it provides possibility to detect what practices works and what are the flaws. The research confirms that one of the greatest challenges in applying Practice theory lies in its methodology – the only way to truly grasp the practices of diplomats is to talk to them, but they are tied by their duties, interests, classified information – that highlights the importance of verifying information provided, but the possibilities to do so are limited as not all of it is accessible. This master thesis gives ground for future research – to explore what new implemented practices are valuable enough to be repeated, how the internal government conflicts affect results and negotiations with allies, how can the card of the host be played when one is a guest, how useful is the tactics of “breaking the silence” during the NATO summit. |
