Lithuanians are traumatized like Poles, but far more pragmatic," says Kai Puto Dominik Wilczewski, author of the book "Lithuania in Lithuanian’.
Kaja Puto: Lithuania is most likely the least known neighbour to Poles. usually we think about it through the prism of common – i.e. colonial – history, we associate with the traces of Polishness. There are surely more Poles who know German, Czech or Ukrainian than those who talk Lithuanian. Why the alienity?
Dominik Wilczewski: This can be seen, unfortunately, even at the level of offers of tourist trips, among which dominate the end-sentimental places connected with the past of Poland – poet Adam Mickiewicz, marshal Józef Piłsudski, Vilnius Ostra Brama, Cemetery on Ross. To any degree this can be explained by the different language of Lithuania, due to the fact that Lithuanian is far more distant than Polish than another neighbours' languages. There is simply a difference in possible from russian times.
The Polish People's Republic was then a window to the planet for Lithuanians – it was worth knowing the Polish language to have better access to planet literature or music, due to the fact that censorship was much lighter than in the USSR. The another way around was most likely not working, and to this day we have consequences. Fortunately, this began to change slow – among another things, as a consequence of the outbreak of a full-scale war in Ukraine. Lithuania is seen as an ally with which joint military or energy projects can be implemented. At the same time, interest in Lithuanian culture is growing. In fresh years, quite a few Lithuanian translations have appeared on the Polish market...
...and your book, which is entitled “Lithuania in LithuanianIt’s okay. ” As far as I realize it, you wanted to show Lithuania as it is from the Lithuanian perspective.
In it I wanted to show how Lithuania and Lithuanian identity was created
And how they had to fight for her. In the 20th century, after the period of national revival, the Lithuanians had to face many different forces who tried to take distant their home or redecorate it. Both the russian and German occupiers expressed paternalism towards them – they saw Lithuania as a tiny country that did not know where it came from.
At the same time, it is simply a country where past is highly heavy. There's no way to realize his modernity without digging up his old trauma. Almost all social debate ends with looking back. Lithuania is akin to Poland in this respect.
For centuries the Grand Duchy of Lithuania existed in the territory of today's Lithuania, which for a large part of its past was connected with the Kingdom of Poland. How do the Lithuanians see her? Are Poles seen as colonizers?
It's changed over the years. In the late 19th century and later, erstwhile a story was needed, around which the formation of the national identity could be built, referenced to the Grand Duchy, but the 1 before the union with Poland, as a period of top splendor and top territorial improvement of Lithuania. The times of the union were portrayed as those in which Lithuania lost its distinctness, identity and the Lithuanians succumbed to polonization. Later on, the russian historiography, which the erstwhile Republic of Poland presented as a state of feudal and exploiters. A fresh generation of historians continued to talk in the russian period, offering a more nuanced view.
Today, rather, it is stressed that Lithuania has been able to keep certain elements of separateness even until the cutting period. There is talk about the values of noble democracy, about the fact that the Union reached Lithuania with elements of European heritage: Renaissance, Baroque, Reformation, Enlightenment. It points to the function of Lithuanian noble families like Radziwillów.
The Grand Duchy of Lithuania is an area in which Lithuania intertwined with Poland and Belarus. erstwhile and under what circumstances was she identified as an identity?
It would be very hard to indicate 1 peculiar moment. Especially that litevism in historical terms is something different from this understood today. Even during the partitions, noble circles in Lithuania were referred to as "gente Lithhuanus, natione Polonus", which can be translated as "Lithuanian origin, Polish nationality", where nationality was understood in a political, civic and not cultural sense. The creators specified as Adam Mickiewicz were aware of the cultural distinctness of the inhabitants of the lands of the erstwhile Grand Duchy, but saw them as part of the wider Polish nation. Modern nations developed in the 19th century and Lithuania was no exception.
The year 1864, erstwhile the January uprising, which was aimed at the revival of the erstwhile Republic, falls, can be considered as a symbolic date from which Polish, Lithuanian, Belarusian movements begin to follow separate paths. This is the time erstwhile a fresh generation of Lithuanian intelligence comes to voice, specified as Jonas Basanavi
ius, very frequently of peasant origin, educated at Russian universities, referring to the work of European historians, ethnographers, linguists. It is thanks to them that the language that has been pushed to the function of the common people is revived. They emphasize that Polishness is something alien, which has brought more harm than good to Lithuania.
And Russia?
Russia, on the 1 hand, was an oppressive power, on the another hand – it played conflicts between different nationalities, sometimes favoring some, e.g. beginning the doors to universities to sons from Lithuanian peasant families. On the another hand, the Belarusians seem to be even more marginalized, subject to polonisation on the 1 hand and russification on the other. The Belarusian movement has so more hard conditions, it comes to voice comparatively late, at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, and must look for its place in the Polish-Lithuanian rivalry.
The Lithuanians had reason to be distrustful of Poles. In 1920, only 2 years after Lithuania regained its independence, Poles occupied part of its territories.
The event is inactive mentioned by the Lithuanians as the top harm suffered by Poles. After Poland won the Polish-bolshevik war, the alleged Żeligian revolt, or the armed business of Vilnius by a branch of the Polish army, was held, as it later turned out – at the command of Marshal Józef Piłsudski. And as Vilnius was the historical capital of Lithuania, this motion was clearly received as an act of aggression from Poland. The outbreak of the Second planet War talks about the “Polish occupation” of Vilnius.
The Second planet War brought Lithuania another business – first Soviet, then German. Is any of them mentioned worse – if specified comparison can be made at all?
The russian business was very dramatic and traumatic in the lives of Lithuanians. It began under state erosion conditions – in June 1940 president Antanas Smethona left the country and the government bent against Stalin's ultimatum. The Red Army entered Lithuania, false elections were held, the country was incorporated into the russian Union as another republic, legalized parties and social organizations, censorship was carried out, nationalization and collectivization began, and the Catholic Church began to be persecuted. Finally, in June 1941, mass deportations were carried out into the russian Union: respective 1000 people were deported, mainly from intelligence families, officials, teachers. That's why the Germans were welcome as liberators. This should not be far-reaching. individual erstwhile said that if aliens landed in Lithuania in June 1941, they would besides be carried on their hands. Let us besides remember that in 1941 the "final solution" has not yet begun. It can so be said that the Lithuanian elite did not know what cooperation with Germany involved.
It turned out to be connected with the demolition of Lithuanian Jews. However, they did not die, like most European Jews, in concentration camps...
In the east areas occupied by the 3rd Reich after the attack on the russian Union took place the alleged holocaust from the bullets ("holocaust by bulllets). The executions of local Jews were held close their residences, they were simply moved out of their homes and shot. Lithuanian collaboration formations were involved.
In 1944, the Soviets returned to power again. However, not all Lithuanians agree easily.
They resisted the Soviets highly long and persistently, about to the mid-1950s, fought about 50,000 people, including people who helped and hid them. The alleged “foresters” fled into the forest and formed guerrilla troops. They were well trained in the usage of weapons – due to the fact that paramilitary organizations functioned well in pre-war Lithuania – and they had easy access to it after the war. Partisanic actions were led by well-organized underground command, which was established in 1949, and his last leader, Jonas Žemaitis, was captured and shot in 1954 by the Soviets, was posthumously declared acting president in independent Lithuania.
The Lithuanians resisted their occupiers, but they besides collaborated with them. You mentioned the Lithuanians' engagement in the executions of Lithuanian Jews. The Lithuanian SRR, including its services, besides formed Lithuanians. Is Lithuania discussing joint work for the crimes committed by the occupiers?
When the victims of the crime were Lithuanians, the perpetrators of the crime are condemned. In the case of the Holocaust, problems arise, especially erstwhile the character who is attributed to the engagement in the persecution or execution of Jews besides fought with the Soviets and died or was executed. Patriotic environments consider specified characters to be heroes, and the findings of historians indicating their work for crimes are inverted. The Lithuanians who participated in the russian force apparatus are not justified. On the another hand, there is simply a discussion about the attitude of intellectuals, creators, writers who someway served the russian system, and at the same time it is believed that they acted to preserve national identity.
At the same time, it is common to argue that the occupiers had to be co-operated, or the occupiers would have sent their own and would have been worse. This explains both collaboration with the 3rd Reich and membership of the Communist Party. erstwhile Lithuanian president Algirdas Brazauskas said in the 1990s that Lithuania had “three percent of believing communists” and the remainder were “normal Lithuanians”. This narrative, of course, served to whitewash itself.
Reading your book you can get the impression that Lithuania barely misses the USSR at all, as is the case in many erstwhile russian republics. There truly isn't a gram of nostalgia in there? The collapse of the USSR was not a trauma to the Lithuanians?
He was traumatized in the sense that force had occurred. In January 1991, russian authorities tried to forcely reconstruct control of Lithuania, which declared independence. An army was introduced to Vilnius, tanks were used, shots were fired, fourteen people were killed. It was a large shock, but at the same time strengthened the Lithuanians in their quest for full independence. Of course, what happened later, namely a shock transformation to the marketplace economy, privatization, the emergence of organized crime, corruption scandals, etc., left a mark on society, but it did not make it yearn for the old order.
Some nostalgia is, but most of all it is nostalgia for youth, for sometimes greater predictability, for organized holidays in the Republic or in Crimea. However, this generation is already leaving, russian times are not a mention point for young people – unless negative. Russia's full-scale aggression on Ukraine has only strengthened this aversion and negative associations.
You mentioned that Russian aggression on Ukraine allowed Poles to look at the Lithuanians more like partners. How did Lithuania itself change under her influence?
I think that was not a breakthrough, but alternatively a message that Russia is simply a threat that the West of Europe does not understand. Lithuania, like another countries in the region, present has a strong sense of ‘I told you so’, accompanied by fear of being another victim of Russian aggression. This fear is followed by concrete actions: military spending – before the annexation of Crimea in 2014, Lithuania spent little than 1 percent of GDP on defence, now it is expected to be over 3 percent, pro-defensive initiatives, e.g. the firearm Union, a state-run paramilitary organization, enjoys large popularity among average Lithuanians, giving citizens the chance to train militarily.
One of the characters in my book said the war allowed the Lithuanians to appreciate what they had achieved. They realize how close it was to being in Ukraine today. For the past 30 years, they have built an independent state, managed to incorporate it into Western structures and are willing to defend it.
The Lithuanians present build their image as David fighting Goliath. Russia stands up, but besides China, for example, through the creation of unrecognized Taiwan representations in Lithuania. Is this a political pire or a show of real strength?
I think we are surviving in a time of mediation, and Lithuania is effectively building its brand, due to the fact that its unconcerned attitude is popular in the West. The Politico portal late awarded Gabriels Landsbergis, erstwhile head of Lithuanian diplomacy, the title of dragon slayer – precisely for his tough position towards China. However, this is not a donquitty – behind specified gestures is the profit and failure account. For example, the Lithuanian authorities decided to strengthen their relations with Taiwan, risking economical retaliation from China. But possible losses are due to economical cooperation with Taiwan, which announced the creation of a semiconductor mill in Lithuania.
On the another hand, Lithuania has a reasonably cautious abroad policy at European level. Take, for example, relations with Germany. Both Poland and Lithuania have bad historical associations with Germany, but Vilnius, unlike Warsaw, does not translate this into modern relations. erstwhile Prime Minister Jarosław Kaczyński said that as long as he was alive, he would not let the German soldier's leg to stand on Polish soil. In Lithuania Germany is simply a leading formation in NATO troops stationed there – and this does not rise any controversy. Lithuanians are straumatized like Poles, but much more pragmatic.
Dominik Wilczewski – an analyst, writer and publicist, an analyst, works at the Faculty of Polish Studies of the University of Warsaw and in the editorial board of the Baltic Review portal. He published, among others, in “New east Europe”, “Common Week” and the monthly magazine “Written. Magazine of Opinions”. He is the author of the book “Lithuania in Lithuanian” and co-author of the monograph “1938. The darkest night is just before dawn. 80th anniversary of establishing diplomatic relations between Poland and Lithuania". He lives in Warsaw.
Kaja Puto – Publicist and editor on east Europe and migration. Related to Political Criticism, Recollective reporter association and n-ost association – The Network for Reporting on east Europe. In 2015-2018, Vice-President of Ha!art.
