The truth of the rotating Presidency of the Council is a bit different, more mundane than lofty. Moreover, the picture painted by the media of the Lithuanian power may be more kitsch than a masterpiece. It is worth remembering, as the rotating Presidencies start quickly but they end even faster. After a half of a year, no one will remember Lithuania's Presidency. In the memories of the European politicians as always will remain only opinions about the country and its people. Will those memories be positive in Lithuania's case? Unfortunately, I am not entirely convinced about that.

Chairing the Council of the European Union was once an important part of the EU policy shaping by the country holding the six-month leadership. But all this has been changed and significantly overvalued since the year 2009, after the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty. Under the agreement, the European Union has acquired the traits of judiciary and started the construction of a European federal state with all its attributes. Since that time, the Presidency has a more honorable role than a causative one. The new position of permanent President of the European Council, which commonly referred to as the President of the Union, and strengthening the role of the EU High Representative of Foreign Affairs, has undermined the importance of the rotating Presidency. The Treaty also acquired the right to represent the Union on the international stage that earlier belonged to the country holding the Presidency. All what the leader state does today is that it offers their ministers to the EU Council, who later preside it.

Modern understanding of the Presidency was heavily shaped by the PR world. Simply speaking, PR serves its country to promote the reputation in the European political and economic arena. It helps in creating local products, driving tourism and, most important, shaping the opinion around the country during that Presidency. That is country's five golden minutes in front of a half of billion European spectators. And how will Lithuania be remembered? I am afraid that not very well. Gestures in politics are symbols of diplomacy. The Lithuanian authorities have already committed a faux pas.

According to the tradition of the Presidency, the President of the European Parliament together with the heads of Parliamentary fractions has to meet with the authorities of the country. Then the important issues that are based on the EU Parliament views are usually being discussed. So it was in Vilnius. At the Presidential Palace the delegation met with the President of Lithuania and the Cabinet of Ministers. Questions were asked; answers were provided, however, not to all of the queries. EP delegation, like at Orwell, was divided to equal and more equal. To those, to whom the answer is given and to others, to whom nothing is said. The chairman of the European Conservatives and Reformists fraction Martin Callanan asked the President and ministers about the national minorities problems solvation in Lithuania. The British politician was surprised when his question was ignored, and he did not receive a response up to the end of the meeting. This indiscretion and the lack of respect for the Parliamentary decency were widely discussed in the corridors of the European Parliament. Consequently, the lack of response to this question was a symbolic admission of guilt and an incentive for those who have been calling Lithuania to respect the rights of national minorities, that are commonly broken in this country's regions. The silence of authorities is also an "expressive" confirmation that the leader of EAPL, MEP Valdemar Tomaševski, who for years has been rightly calling for the protection of national minorities' rights, which should be also based on the EU standards and the EU law, was purely right.

Currently, Europe sees even more clearly that Lithuania uses discriminatory practices against minorities, especially indigenous Polish minority, and does not comply with the Framework Convention's provisions for the Protection of National Minorities. Lithuania does not have a law on protecting national minorities, while minorities constitute as much as 16 percent of the total population of the country. Prohibition to write the name and surname in the documents in its original form, anti-minority educational reform, the penalties for the use of bilingual sign posts in the areas inhabited mostly by Poles - all of this places Lithuania in the uncomfortable position on a day before its Presidency. A number of politicians in Brussels raise the question whether a country that violates the rights of national minorities, has the moral right to the Presidency of the Union that largely supports ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity?

It is more than certain that these topics will be discussed in the European Parliament prior to the first of July. Will it be the time when Lithuania civilizes its legislation on national and ethnic minorities? Will it stop discriminatory practices? Will the country start to follow the European standards? Or will it continue a habit of ignoring Parliamentary questions, not answering them, and - like in Vilnius - will it commit another faux pas? The Presidency can strongly shape opinions about the leading country. The nearest future will be an indicator of the opinion that Lithuania will leave after its Presidency.

Dr. Bogusław Rogalski

Political scientist, ECR Adviser for International Affairs in the European Parliament