Generolo Jono Žemaičio Lietuvos karo akademija

This paper critically analyses the escalating security challenges facing the European Union, primarily defined by the Russian Federation's military aggression against Ukraine after 2022 and the return of great power tensions. This transformation of the security environment has definitively ended the era of post-conflict peace on the European continent and exposed deep structural vulnerabilities in assuring sovereign European defence. The analysis identifies three key structural challenges: the critical fragmentation of Member States' defence capabilities and capacities, the limited ability to respond to high-intensity conflict, and the industrial unpreparedness of the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base. It is asserted that the EU’s persistent reliance on external guarantees, particularly amid rising transatlantic uncertainty, jeopardises its political sovereignty. To overcome these structural limitations, the paper advocates for a deeper integration trajectory towards the concept of a Total Defence Union. It posits that strengthening European defence is a strategic imperative for maintaining Europe's stability and international standing in an era of increasing great power rivalry.

The paper presents the results of a sectoral analysis of the Czech Republic’s security environment and interprets them from the perspective of strategic studies. Its objective is to identify key structural trends shaping the operational and strategic environment and to derive their implications for defence planning, capability development, and the long-term transformation of the Armed Forces of the Czech Republic. The analysis shows that the security environment in last years is characterized by persistent geopolitical instability and accelerating technological change. The rapid diffusion of unmanned systems and artificial intelligence applications is transforming the conduct of warfare and increasing demands for capability modernization, interoperability, and force readiness. At the same time, demographic and societal pressures are deepening, affecting the personnel sustainability of the armed forces and the overall strategic resilience of the state. Economic and environmental factors intensify competition for resources and raise demands for the prioritization of defence investments. The findings confirm the growing interdependence of sectors and the necessity of integrated assessment of the security environment as a foundation for force and capability development.

This paper examines how digital media discourse influences national security and institutional trust using UK-related data (39,760 mentions; reach 255.3 million) collected between November 2025 and April 2026. Applying AI-assisted media analytics, it identifies key risk patterns, including the dominance of negative sentiment, platform-driven amplification, and the transnational circulation of narratives. The findings show how these dynamics generate structural vulnerabilities for democratic institutions and complicate strategic communication. The study proposes a practical analytical framework for monitoring influence operations, enabling earlier detection of coordinated campaigns and supporting faster, evidence-based policy responses in complex digital information environments today.

This paper explores strategic communication as a key instrument for countering hybrid threats in contemporary democratic states. The author, drawing on conceptual analysis, policy documents and practical case studies, examines the role of strategic communication in strengthening societal resilience, shaping public narratives, and responding to information-based aggression. He defines hybrid threats as multidimensional and adaptive phenomena operating below the threshold of armed conflict, exploiting institutional, psychological and informational vulnerabilities. Simultaneously, he argues that strategic communication, when coordinated, credible and value-based, constitutes an essential component of national security policy. The analysis identifies four core functions – informational, preventive, coordinative and normative – and highlights challenges related to institutional fragmentation, analytical capacity, and ethical dilemmas. Based on the findings, the author formulates normative and practical recommendations for policymakers. He concludes that strategic communication is not only a reactive tool but also a proactive mechanism for narrative resilience and democratic integrity in the age of non-linear conflict.

Over the past ten years, Western defence analysts have assumed that, in any hypothetical war, Russia would be substantially, if not entirely, a sanctuary from NATO operations and even attacks. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has challenged this assumption for two main reasons: it is implausible to defend one’s country effectively without striking into the enemy’s territory; and Ukraine has successfully struck and even invaded Russia without provoking nuclear escalation. Western hesitation toward hypothetical strikes on Russia is increasingly strained under these pressures, yet little dedicated analysis has emerged to evaluate the consequences of granting or denying Russia sanctuary. The article first explores the concept of sanctuary as such and the modern literature that implicitly or explicitly assumes Russia would be a sanctuary in case of war. Second, it discusses the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, Ukraine’s campaign against Russia itself and, implicitly, Western hesitations about targeting Russia. Finally, it engages with the various military, strategic, and political considerations of extending or not extending sanctuary to Russia.

Contemporary studies show that military power depends not only on manpower, weapons, or resources, but in many cases, success on the battlefield is determined by the potential of human capital, including knowledge, skills, competences, and other capacities [1; 2]. Using a cost-based approach, the author focuses on the input side assessing military human capital potential in the context of defence expenditure – economic development nexus in the Baltic countries, such as Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. The investigation covers the period between 2004 and 2020. Defence expenditure on personnel has been used as a proxy for military human capital potential, and real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita as a proxy for economic development. Research is carried out using econometric methods, including Spearman’s correlation analysis and Automatic Linear Modelling (ALM). The research results reveal that investments in military personnel have significant and positive impact on economic development in the Baltic states. Defence expenditure on personnel explains 63.7 percent of variation in real GDP per capita in Lithuania, 71.3 percent in Latvia, and 63.4 percent in Estonia. The author hopes that the findings of the investigation will extend the scope of research across the Baltic States and will be useful for the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 8, economic g rowth).

Ensuring the defence of freedom, independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and population belongs to the main tasks of each state. Therefore, countries, in response to the current political, security and economic situation, must earmark, within the framework of their national budgets, a proportion of the available resources to ensure their defence. The aim of the article, based on current trends in the defence budgets of the European Union member states, is point out that not only the global economic and financial crisis and the credit and debt crisis in the euro area have a significant negative impact on the amount of resources, which individual European Union member states earmark to ensure their defence.

Public procurement as a system of procedures for purchasing goods and services is quite complex. Especially having in mind international legal regulation and high requirements for the assurance of such principles as transparency, fair competition, non-discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality. Thus from the other side of the issue, in special fields as defence and national security, it is not always possible to strictly observe the mentioned rules. Institutions in a state, which is facing threats, must be able to flexibly; this would allow balancing the urgency and competiveness of purchasing procedures. Still such situations require clear managing system and legal regulation supporting it. In this article, the authors present the preliminary analysis of management of public procurement for defence and security via disaster management cycle theory and mostly focus on the phase of response towards certain destructive actions. The managerial aspect of the issue is supplemented by the analysis of the legal regulation, which should support managerial processes. Having in mind that in different phases of the disaster management cycle, different methods of management (requiring special legal regulation, as legitimation of such actions) should be applied, examples of two countries are presented. Lithuania as a member state of European Union is chosen to illustrate the reflections of managerial processes in legal acts, which are passed in the phases of mitigation and preparedness. Ukrainian example is presented to illustrate the difficulties, which state may face, when managerial processes as well as legitimation thereof in legal regulations are developed in the phase of response. To answer these questions, literature review, comparison, analyses of documents, synthesis and other methods were used. It is concluded that the public procurement processes definitely should be prepared in advance and every state should be ready for the urgent purchases before the direct threats for security appears. Ukrainian example shows, how it is difficult, costly and requiring other efforts to develop these processes and implement it in the same time. It should be mentioned that raised questions are in the constant process of learning and this article should be considered as a primary steps towards deep analysis of the continuity of state actions in the situations of real threats and tensions, which Europe is facing today.