Audris Narbutas. Širinskienė's departure is like a political earthquake

This situation is not just another withdrawal, and I will seek to substantiate my views with arguments.

Although it is not usual to compare Ms Širinskienė to a butterfly, her departure from the Nemuno Aušra resembles the butterfly effect. By leaving Nemuno Aušra, Širinskienė caused a political earthquake. Not all of her fractures are indeed visible at first sight.

Širinskienė's departure will seriously impact at least four influential political forces: the Dawn-Breakers, the Social Democrats, the Skvernelis Democrats, and even the Peasants.

There are few politicians in Parliament whose withdrawal would carry such weight, but Agnė is one of them. Let's take a closer look at the first consequences of the withdrawal.

Širinskienė was, or at least hoped to be, an essential figure in Nemuno Aušra. Even before the elections, when Žemaitaitis was out of the Seimas, there was a great need for a person to represent the party in the Parliament.

And certainly not an extra, but a visible political leader.

Širinskienė, who we can safely call one of the most visible members of the Seimas, perfectly met this need. Moreover, she was not just a politician but a lawyer, which helped to buffer the legal problems of Žemaitaitis a little and contributed to creating the narrative of persecution.

After the Seimas elections, not only Žemaitaitis and Širinskienė but also a large group of less important and experienced political personalities came to the Parliament, who potentially needed a political steward.

Širinskienė was preparing for this role. Still, there was one major problem, the same one that the tandem of Rolandas Paksas and Artūras Paulauskas had faced many years ago – diarchy is one of the worst forms of governance.

It is not for the personality of Žemaitaitis to be satisfied with bipartism. It programmed the natural friction that cost the party's most influential politician after Remigijus' departure. Interestingly, by going to Skvernelis, Širinskienė managed to score a political goal for Žemaitaitis and secured some protection. For now, the coalition's disintegration looks like a bluff because nobody has anything more to offer Žemaitaitis than he could or would like, so he must be more cautious in criticising Širinskienė.

Although Gintautas Paluckas does not seem to play even a minor role in this story, the departure of Širinskienė is indeed significant for him. On the one hand, Paluckas may be happy that Širinskienė has not gone elsewhere, for example, to the Peasants. Her vote in the Seimas will undoubtedly contribute to winning significant votes for the Government.

This function would be even stronger if it turned out that Žemaitaitis' withdrawal from the coalition was not a bluff after all. On the other hand, it strengthened Skvernelis, not the Social Democrats. Even before Širinskienė's departure, Skverneli's influence on Paluckas was already too strong.

Thanks to Skvernelis efforts, the Nemuno Aušra, and not Karbauskis's LVŽS, ended up in the government. Moreover, Skvernelis was the one who washed his uniform when he started to criticise Žemaitaitis fiercely, so the responsibility for the latter's nonsense fell on Paluckas. Now, Skvernelis' influence will only grow.

By bringing in Širinskienė, the DSVL and Skvernelis are significantly strengthening their positions on two fronts. The first front is the coalition – with more political leaders and parliamentarians, the Democrats can speak more forcefully with Paluckas and Žemaitaitis.

This is useful both in a stable coalition and even in the event of a coalition collapse because, in such a case, Paluckas would desperately need a strong partner from the DVSL. But this is not the end. We should not forget that neither Christmas nor the New Year has eliminated the tension between Karbauskis LVŽS and Skvernelis DVSL. Skvernelis needs a strong ally against Karbauskis, and Širinskienė is one of the best possible candidates for this position.

If Skvernelis' advantage over LVŽS is increasing, the latter is certainly not benefiting from the addition of Širinskienė. Ramūnas Karbauskis's former right-hand woman is dangerous for the Peasants not only because she knows so much about the party but also because she is likely to be one of the people who, in the event of a coalition collapse, would diminish the Peasants' chances of being included in the new Government.

So, we don't have many politicians in the Seimas whose departure would have such serious political consequences. We can only congratulate Skvernelis, who, like a schoolboy who has learnt Sun Tzu's lessons in the art of warfare, has made yet another brilliant move. The same can be said of Agnė herself. However, today, it is difficult to predict how Ms Širinskienė's position in the DVSL will change. Will Agnė's political hunger for the post of Deputy Speaker of the Seimas be satisfied, or will Agnė sink among the DVSL? Time will tell.