Lithuania’s parliament has passed the first of two required votes to repeal a constitutional provision prohibiting weapons of mass destruction and foreign military bases from being stationed on the country’s territory. The October 6 vote passed by 106 votes to 18, with six abstentions, comfortably exceeding the two-thirds threshold required for constitutional amendments.
The same day, Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys publicly invited the United States to establish a permanent military base in Lithuania and said Vilnius was prepared to cover all associated costs. The developments prompted a warning from the Kremlin, which said an expanding US or NATO military presence close to Russian territory would increase rather than reduce regional tensions.
What exactly does Article 137 of Lithuania’s Constitution currently prohibit?
Article 137 states that weapons of mass destruction and military bases belonging to foreign states may not be stationed on Lithuanian territory. The provision dates from Lithuania’s post-Soviet constitutional settlement, when withdrawal of Russian forces and preservation of national sovereignty were central political concerns.
The proposed amendment would repeal Article 137 in its entirety. Its explanatory memorandum argues that Lithuania’s security environment has changed fundamentally since the Constitution was adopted because the country is now a NATO member whose defence depends on collective deterrence.
The proposal specifically identifies NATO nuclear deterrence as one reason for changing the Constitution. Supporters argue that Lithuania should not legally exclude defence options that other NATO members may use if the country faces aggression or a severe military threat.
Repeal would not itself place nuclear weapons in Lithuania. It would remove the domestic constitutional prohibition, while any actual deployment would still involve political decisions, alliance agreements and Lithuania’s international legal obligations.
Has Lithuania already approved the constitutional change?
No. October 6 was only the first of two constitutionally required parliamentary votes.
Lithuania’s Constitution requires amendments outside certain specially protected chapters to be approved twice by at least two-thirds of all members of parliament. The two votes must be separated by at least three months.
Lithuania’s Seimas has 141 members, meaning at least 94 votes are required during each ballot. The first vote passed with 106 members in favour, while the second vote is scheduled for January 12, 2027.
The existing prohibition therefore remains in force. Describing Lithuania as already having legalised nuclear deployment would incorrectly convert a first-stage constitutional vote into a completed amendment.
Why is Lithuania considering the change now?
Lithuanian officials increasingly view Russia as the country’s central military threat. Lithuania borders Russia’s Kaliningrad region and Belarus and sits on NATO’s strategically sensitive northeastern flank.
The war in Ukraine and wider confrontation between Russia and NATO have intensified discussion about whether Baltic states need stronger allied forces permanently stationed on their territory. Lithuania already hosts allied troops, including a rotating US armoured presence and a growing German military deployment.
The constitutional amendment’s explanatory documents argue that Article 137 was created under historical circumstances that no longer reflect Lithuania’s position inside NATO. Supporters say the country should be able to participate fully in alliance deterrence rather than constitutionally removing possible options before a security crisis occurs.
Critics argue that permanently allowing nuclear weapons could increase Lithuania’s exposure during a confrontation and further militarise relations with Russia.
Does Lithuania actually need to repeal Article 137 to host allied military forces?
The legal situation is more nuanced than the constitutional wording suggests. Lithuania’s Constitutional Court previously ruled that Article 137 does not necessarily prohibit facilities jointly controlled with NATO allies under international defence agreements.
Lithuania already hosts foreign allied troops without those deployments being treated as unconstitutional foreign bases. Existing agreements with the United States and Germany allow allied forces to use Lithuanian infrastructure while respecting Lithuanian sovereignty.
The more consequential issue is the absolute prohibition on weapons of mass destruction. The explanatory memorandum acknowledges that the existing text creates particular uncertainty over nuclear weapons that NATO allies might control themselves.
Repealing the entire article therefore provides maximum legal flexibility, although even Lithuanian parliamentary analysis has noted that removing the foreign-base wording may not be strictly necessary for existing NATO arrangements.
What did Lithuania offer the United States on a permanent military base?
Foreign Minister Budrys invited Washington to establish a permanent American base and said Lithuania was willing to cover all associated costs. His statement followed comments by US President Donald Trump indicating that Washington would consider establishing a base in Lithuania.
The United States has maintained a rotating armoured presence in Lithuania since 2019, but rotation is different from a permanent independently designated base. A permanent arrangement could involve infrastructure, long-term personnel commitments and a substantially different political signal toward Russia.
No agreement establishing such a base has been announced. Lithuania’s offer is therefore a government proposal directed toward Washington, not a completed bilateral basing agreement.
Any future arrangement would need detailed negotiations covering command, legal status, infrastructure, cost-sharing and operational control.
Why did Russia immediately warn Lithuania about escalation?
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said the constitutional vote and discussion of a permanent American military base represented developments that Moscow viewed with concern. Russia has consistently opposed expansion of NATO military infrastructure near its borders.
Lithuania sees the same issue from the opposite perspective. Vilnius argues that stronger NATO deployments deter Russian aggression and make conflict less likely by removing uncertainty about whether allies would defend the Baltic region.
This produces a classic security dilemma: measures one government describes as defensive are portrayed by its rival as threatening. That disagreement has become increasingly acute since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The nuclear dimension raises the stakes further because allowing the possibility of NATO nuclear deployments would move Lithuania into a much more sensitive category of alliance deterrence planning.
What are the key takeaways from Lithuania’s October 6 defence votes and proposals?
Parliament has approved the repeal of Article 137 only at the first stage. The measure received 106 votes, exceeding the required two-thirds threshold, but it must pass a second vote after at least three months before becoming part of the Constitution.
Lithuania has also invited the United States to establish a permanent military base and offered to pay the associated costs. Washington has not yet accepted that proposal.
Repealing Article 137 would create legal flexibility for future NATO nuclear deployments but would not automatically bring nuclear weapons into Lithuania. Any such decision would require separate political and alliance-level action.
Could Lithuania become a significantly more important NATO frontline state?
It already is one of NATO’s most exposed members geographically, but permanent American basing and potential nuclear-hosting flexibility would deepen that role substantially.
The second constitutional vote in January will therefore matter well beyond Lithuanian domestic politics. If the amendment passes again, Vilnius will have deliberately removed a major legal limitation created when independence from the Soviet Union was still fresh.
The underlying message is clear even though future deployments remain uncertain: Lithuania wants fewer legal restrictions on the military assistance NATO allies could provide during a crisis with Russia.
Discover more from Business-News-Today.com
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
