First Latgale Latvian Congress 1917 April 26-27

Pirmā_Latgales_kongresa_delegāti_ar_lozungiem

The delegates of the First Latvian Congress in Rēzekne April 26-27 1917

The two days of April that according to new style calendar was May 9-10 was one of the most crucial and important days for Latvian nation. On April 26-27 the members of Latgalian Latvian political and cultural elite came to a common congress in Rēzekne and decided that the region of Latgale is part of Latvia and Latgalian Latvians are part of Latvian nation living in Kurzeme (Courland), Zemgale (Semigallia) and Vidzeme. This was crucial decision since Latgale region was separated from rest of Latvia by political means for many centuries. After the breakdown of Russian Empire, Latgale then part of Vitebsk province was in danger of becoming part of Russia, Poland or possible Belarusian state. Latgale that was not ethnically homogeneous region had to decide on their own to whom they want to join – united autonomous or independent Latvian state or Russia and Belarus. And large Russian, Polish and Belarusian minority in Latgale also had their say. In the end despite disagreements within their own ranks the leading Latgalian politicians and cultural workers decided to join with rest of Latvia. But, this act was not made without demands and expectations that Latgalians wanted to receive from rest of Latvia. Many of these expectations were not met, many were misunderstood, leading to new strife and disappointment that was present during first independence and appeared again during our time.

Latgalian tribe (latgaļi) as the largest proto-latvian tribe emerged in 5-8 century. Their area of population was nowadays Eastern Latvia along the right bank of river Daugava, stretching into east and south in present day Russia and Belarus. The Medieval chronicles mention Latgalians as ethnic group that had own statehood’s – Jersika, Tālava (Tolova), Atzele, Lotigola ect. that had extended relations with Russian duchies of Polotsk and Pskov who required to pay them tributes and the ruler of Jersika Visvaldis became Orthodox.

The Northern Crusades of 12-13th century placed all nowadays Estonia and Latvia under the Catholic Livonian order rule who was vassal of the Teutonic order. During the era of Livonian Confederation the Latgale region had no political division as the lands were divided between Livonian knights and the Archbishop of Riga. However, the differences in culture and dialect between Western and Eastern Latvians were present as Curonians in the west had their own distinctions and Latgalians had theirs. However, all of them were united into single state and only vassal and senior restrictions prevented them from visiting each other. Medieval Latvians were mostly peasants tied to their land and senior German land owner either from church or the order.

In 15th-16th century Livonian confederation experienced turbulence caused by Reformation, decay of Hanseatic league and threat from Russia. Large part of population became Lutheran, while others opposed. Livonia became a weak state unable to centralize power and in 1558 Russia invaded Livonia starting Livonian war that was joined by Poland-Lithuania, Denmark and Sweden. On 1561 the Northern Estonia with Reval (Tallinn) became part of Sweden while Livonian Order and Archbishop of Riga surrendered to Sigismund II of Poland-Lithuania. The new rulers divided nowadays Latvia and part of Estonia into Duchy of Courland and Semigallia and Duchy of Livonia (Pārdaugava). Riga, Vidzeme and Latgale became part of Duchy of Livonia.

Polish-Lithuanian rule over these lands were short-lived. In 1600 just 17 years after the end of Livonian war a new war broke out between Poland-Lithuania and Sweden. Sweden took over Vidzeme and Riga. Duchy of Courland remained semi-independent while Poland-Lithuania kept only small part of former Livonian duchy. The border between both countries were sent along the river Daugava and Aiviekste in 1621. The treaty made division between Aiviekste river and Swedish controlled region became known as Vidzeme (Middle-Land). The land on the right bank of river Daugava and Aiviekste was now called Inflanty Voivodeship or Livonian Voivodeship. This province set the boundaries for Latgale region.

Latvian Land map by G. Reyer in 1859 excludes Latgale from Latvian lands

Inflanty was not a duchy, but as simple province of Poland-Lithuania. That meant that religious freedoms and privileges for the German landlords that existed in Livonian duchy was non-existent. Poland-Lithuania was a Catholic nation and it also wanted to send in Polish and Lithuanian landlords. First step was to return the local populace to Catholic faith. While some of the peasants followed their Lutheran landlords, orders simply diverted back to pagan beliefs in absence of landlord or local church. Jesuit order was established and converted the people back to Catholic faith. Lands were acquired by Polish and Lithuanian landlords who also sent in people from Poland, Lithuania and Belarus. Also the Jews migrated in to Latgale and settled in most towns. Meanwhile because of division in Russian Orthodox church the Old Believers settled and made refuge in Inflanty.

 Meanwhile rest of nowadays Latvia was mostly Lutheran, first books in Latvian were published 100 years earlier, despite the Jesuits also teaching in Latvian and publishing books. The peasant conditions are said to be harsher in Inflanty then rest of Latvia. Contacts with rest of Latvia were limited and even contacts within Inflanty was limited because of territorial laws and regulations. In such circumstances Latgalian Latvians made three distinctions – Catholic faith, own special customs and traditional dress and finally the most important the Latgalian dialect with its own regional divisions within Latgale.

In 1772 Russia took over Inflanty and simply joined with Vitebsk province. This did not bring Latgalian unification with rest of Latvians. The rest of Latvia was divided in Courland and Livonian province and was part of special Baltic region that had special rights like abolishing serfdom in 1817-1819, while it was abolished in Latgale in 1861 with rest of Russia. That meant that Latgalians had limited freedom of movement for a very long time, also the Latgalians after the abolish of serfdom as Catholics had limitations to buy land while Orthodox and Lutherans did not. Large part of Latgalians were forced to emigrate to Belarus, Russia and Siberia to get land and often had to convert.

Most crucial was ban on Latin print that was in place from 1865-1904 and multiple russification policies that hit Latgale the hardest because it was simple Russian province. After the ban on Latin was canceled, new Latgalian newspapers appeared, cultural societies emerged and more contacts with rest of Latvia were made. In such circumstances the polonization and russification made crucial advances especially in areas populated by Latvians, Poles, Russians and Belarusians creating identity confusion. A special kind a “nationality” was  tuteiši – the local. These people often know more than one of these languages and their own means of identity was their local village and church they belonged to.

Francis_Trasuns_(2)

Latgalian political leader Francis Trasuns

Francis_kemps

Leader of the Latgalian nationalists Francis Kemps

New political leaders emerged such as Francis Trasuns, Francis Kemps and Nikodems Raicāns. Francis Kemps made the term – “Latgale” and “Latgalian”  (Latgalietis). Francis Trasuns was elected in the first Russian Duma who actively promoted the Latgalian national revival. As Russification faced defeat, new schools teaching mainly in Latvian and Latgalian emerged. On 1915 German army invaded and split the Latvia in two. Daugava served as front line and Latgale still in Russian control faced unforeseeable future. 10-12 thousand Latgalians served Latvian Riflemen regiments, despite not having any regional representation.

This long intro leads in to early 1917. The Tsarist government was brought down. Germans were on the move and the future of Latvia had many possibilities.  A national autonomy within Russian Republic, soviet autonomy if the Bolsheviks seize power – or part of German empire.

Two main Latgalian factions had different goals. Francis Kemps who lead the Latgalian Peoples committee was against joining with “baltīšim” or how he called rest of Latvians, with no guarantees for national cultural autonomy to preserve Latgalian cultural and linguistic distinction. Francis Trasuns also wanted to keep the distinctions, but determined that first Latgalians must unite and then ask for guarantees. Other faction was Bolshevik supporters – they were also for uniting with Latvia, but soviet Latvia not bourgeois. The very important Latgalian clergy supported uniting with rest of Latvia so it could be protected from Bolsheviks.

It was important that Latgalians join in common event to proclaim their political intentions to all Latvia and for that the First Latgale Latvian Congress was issued on April 26-27. The congress was held in central city in Latgale – Rēzekne. Congress met resistance from Francis Kemps and Bolsheviks. Kemps and his supporters left the congress while angry mob of Bolshevik supporters gathered around the building where the congress was held and threatened to disrupt the event. The Bolshevik delegates who left the congress called the participants “Latgalian traitors” and called to burn down the building. Angry mob started to throw stones, while defiant Latgalian leader Francis Trasuns declared that he will not leave trough side doors to run, but will come out trough same front doors he entered or will be carried out. A sudden rain shower forced angry crowd to leave and congress went on as expected.

The most crucial result of congress was the declaration that expressed will of joining with provinces of Kurzeme and Vidzeme. That was clear signal for Latvian, German and Russian politicians. The congress also decided to held the elections for Provisional Land Council that was realized and many of its members later joined the Latvian National Provisional Council. On December 3-4 1917 II congress was held that was done after Bolshevik takeover in Petrograd (St. Petersburg) and the vote was made of leaving the Vitebsk Province. 202 Russian and Jewish delegates voted against. However, the Bolshevik government approved the succession from Vitebsk.

Latgales_kongress_1917._gadā_plakāts_skolu_vajadzībām

Latgale Latvian congress in Rēzekne. Painting by Jēkabs Strazdinš 1935. Used for schools and public offices

On November 18 1920 in Riga the Republic of Latvia was proclaimed and Latgale as third star in Latvian coat of arms was recognized as part of new republic. Then month later the Bolsheviks invaded and took control over Latgale. The Latvian Soviet Government wanted Latgale as part of Soviet Latvia, while Bolsheviks in Vitebsk did not respect the earlier votes and started to make their own power structures loyal to the Belarusian soviet socialist republic. So in February 20-25 in various cities of Latgale the communist party workers congress made vote to join Soviet Latvia.

During the War for Independence Poland, Lithuania and Belarusian People’s Republic all made claims on Latgale. In the end on 1920 Latvian army with Polish assistance took over all Latgale, leaving out only small spots of ethnic Latvian majority. Poland and Lithuania dropped their claims for Latgale, while Belarusian Peoples Republic ceased to exist. Latgale now had common border with Soviet Russia and Belarus that later joined in Soviet Union and Poland.

Latgale was finally joined with Latvia, but the divisions continued to persist. During the creation of the Latvian constitution the Satversme, Latgalian political parties with Trasuns and Kemps demanded to permit national cultural autonomy – self-rule, use of Latgalian language in official documents and state funded education in Latgalian. All of these demands were overturned and fiercely objected by Latvian Social Democrats and Nationalists. Latgalians were allowed to have newspapers in Latgalian, hold lessons in school in Latgalian. But, more autonomy from Riga was not allowed. Latgalian leaders including Trasuns were disappointed and continued political efforts for Latgalian cause until his death in 1926. He even joined with his past rival Kemps. Latgalian nationalists also had conflicts with Russians, Poles and Belarusians who wanted their own cultural autonomy and schools. While minority schools for them were allowed, the Latgalian activists saw this as continued means of polonization and russification. Meanwhile Latvian nationalists saw the Latgalian language and culture as simple backwardness and made efforts to “bring light” to the “dark Latgalian people”.

Cross national and cultural struggle continued and was signified by Kārlis Ulmanis regime, who regarded Latgalian nationalism as danger to his idea of “United Latvia”. However, Latgalian language never lost its prominence in the region. Soviet occupation further made efforts to diminish Latgalian language. At first Soviet Union was the only nation that in its national census made entry “Latgalian”. After WW2 this entry was removed and all Latgalian Latvians were counted as Latvians even if they did not wish so. The Soviet era saw large move of people within Latvia. Latgalians moved to Riga, even Kurzeme and mostly assimilated into local Latvian culture. Also Latvians moved more to Latgale then before. Latgale also became more subjected to Russian and Belarusian immigration with many cities and areas having Russian speaking majority. Before the war the Jews made majority in most Latgalian towns. After holocaust the towns were taken over by Russian speakers. Soviets never fully destroyed Latgalian culture and language and after the independence the Latgalian revival started again.

latgales_karogs

The flag of Latgale designed during second independence using elements from Inlfanty voivodship and Latvian flag

The second independence brought many of the same issue as during first. While there is no serious talk about Latgalian national autonomy, the efforts of reviving Latgalian language and culture is still important topic. Latgalian historians, cultural workers and folklorists often complain that Latgalian culture is left out of Latvian cultural mainstream and Latvians don’t understand or ignore Latgale. Latgalian municipalities often complain that Riga central government ignores Latgale and leaves it in poverty. While the government is worried about its eastern border especially after the events of 2014.

Latgalian non Latvian speaking population the Poles, Russians and Belarusians always have brought some national political turbulence. During the formation of First Latgale Latvian congress the selection of delegates excluded many non-Latgalian Latvian delegates. Month later Latgale Russian congress was held in Rēzekne and issued clear support for Latgale as part of Vitebsk province. The problematic relations persisted during independence as Poles and Belarusians were accused of separatism.   When Latvia regained independence, according to some historians in early 1990’s Russian secret services had plans for Russian people’s republics in Latgale, similar to Moldova. These plans were never realized, but some provocative forces have expressed demands for national autonomy while these demands have not been supported by Latgalian Latvians. After the Crimea crisis in 2014, there have been various provocations in the internet calling for “Latgalian Peoples Republic”. Even the BBC has made provocation making WW3 movie that starts in Latgale taken over by pro-Russian separatists. Latgale has not been Latvian or Latgalian only for many centuries. However, the Russian speaking separatists do not speak on behalf of even all Russian speakers in Latgale, who want to remain in Latvia.

With its political, ethnic and cultural cross points Latgale is point of interest and very important part of Latvia, its culture and history. For 100 years Latvia has been united with Latgale, many efforts are to be made by both sides to be united forever.

Selected Sources:

Latgales latviešu kongress 1917. Materiālu krājums. Latgales kultūras centra izdevniecība. Rēzeknē 2016.

Zirnis, Egīls. Trešā zvaigznes iedegšana. Sestdiena. 13-20. aprīlis. 2017. 

Comments Off on First Latgale Latvian Congress 1917 April 26-27

Filed under Historical Articles

Latvia 2016: The Gathering Storm

2016 is heading for closure and it’s time to set the record what happened this year and what to expect of next 12 months. Many has called 2016 as one of the worst years in the decades. It was time of rather unexpected events, sad events and tragic events. While Latvia overall had mostly peaceful year it all can change basing on all the events that happened abroad. The country is planning to spend 60 million euros on 100th anniversary on independence on 2018. Two years are still in wait for that. But, these two years are could be the most crucial for our country and might as well determine will Latvia be able to mark its 100 years of independence at all. For there is a danger that in 2-3 years Latvia might lose its independence and sovereignty. In this review it will be explained why this can happen and what could we do to prevent it.

 

The weakening of the West and its impact on Latvia

 

Two most crucial events that will go down in history of 2016 will be the Brexit and US Presidential election. Both events weakened UK, EU and US on political and economic scale. It revealed a wide fraction of society in US and EU that is not satisfied with politics of the liberal and leftist elites that had ruled for last 20 years and has given their votes for populism, far right clinging politics and authoritarian style of politics. Their dissatisfaction with current so called establishment is both rational and irrational and is based on their personal experiences and misfortunes. Despite the obvious Russian meddling and support for these movements it’s clear that they have strong support base and these movements have managed to strike on both of UK and US and that is bad news for our country. Firstly as UK has yet to make the crucial step to leave EU there is plenty of speculation of how it will affect the thousands of Latvian guest workers in UK, how it will affect the EU market and what impact it will leave on our economy. So far UK has kept its solid position in NATO, the new foreign minister Boris Johnson is widely critical on Russian criminal foreign policy (regarding his past warm connections with Russia), but we will see how this will change after new elections 2020 that is however a long wait from now. In US the situation has become unpredictable every day. The country has been affected by Russian secret service orchestrated hacking that helped Donald J. Trump to win, who has high expectations of friendship with Russian leader Vladimir Putin and who has shown disregard to NATO and the defense of Europe. Donald Trump runs his politics as reality show, every day feeding twitter with his outlandish tweets and load announcements and claims. He has made US unpredictable just as Russia has been for years. From words to actions he has appointed an oil cooperation CEO Rex Tillerson as State Secretary who of no doubt is in unfavor of  Russian containment policy that means sanctions against his business partners and low oil prices. Judging by the logic of business not politics his and Trumps decision in 2017 would be full or partial   removal of sanctions against Russia.

For Latvia this means a dangerous return to diplomatic situation of 1938-1940. Back then Latvia had no real allies. UK and France was distant and skeptical about their support for Baltic States against Nazi Germany and Soviet Union. In the end the fate of Latvia was determined by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union, both of whom Latvia had signed non-aggression pacts. Left without support from outside it was forced to choose between bloody war of survival or shameful silent submission. It choose the second option and we still bear the bitter fruits of that. Russia is aiming to repeat this once again. We really cannot predict Trump’s politics – will he remove sanctions, minimize US involvement in NATO and drop pledge to defend every each of them? Or the Trumps expectations of Putin and Putin of Trump would end in mutual disappointment and confrontation would again increase? Then there is more hardly calculable factors in Europe that threaten to create this situation – first its elections in France that would bring right-wing leader Marine le Pen or François Fillon to power. Both has shown their open sympathy to Russia and suggesting the ease of relations on expense of Ukraine and Baltic States. Then there is Germany – Angela Merkel has been in power for 11 years and her leadership is fading in light of integration failure, refugee failure and recent terrorist act. In 2017 she faces Federal Elections. Again her competitors is making criticism on relations with Russia. If both of these countries drop the Russian containment policy the diplomatic and security position of Latvia would severely weaken.

Let’s be clear however, while Germany and France can be still called reliable allies for the Baltic States they are certainly no friends for Ukraine. The so-called Minsk ceasefire that has not been in effect since its implementation, brokered both by Holland and Merkel has made Eastern Ukraine into active frozen conflict where lives are lost almost daily on both sides without much achievements or changes. “No change on the Eastern Ukrainian Front” one would say. The constant bleed out of Ukraine only serves the Russia. US and EU is giving Ukraine both carrot and stick. A carrot of some humanitarian or non-lethal military support on basis of not breaking ceasefire and stick of continuing criticism and pushover for lack of reforms in the country that is not entirely unjustified. But such situation cannot last forever, Ukraine has to strike back and regain villages and cities used as bases for constant attacks on Ukrainian positions. And who to judge Ukraine for doing so – it’s their land, that has been captured by foreign country disguised as separatists. The ones who will judge will be wealthy European countries who does not have an open border with Russia – yet.

So both for Ukraine and the Baltic States a situation can be possible in next two years when they have no allies. One ally could still be Poland. While it’s rigged with inner political struggle between nationalistic government and liberal opposition, its shows a stiff opposition to Russia and calls for militarization and tough response. If Finland or Sweden would join the NATO, with their proximity to Russia they may show reliance to Baltic States. But, if UK, Germany and France would drop out of collective security policy and most important the US than Latvia as well as Poland is in danger. The very aim of Russia is to defeat the NATO adversary without a fight. A direct conflict could end in bitter destructive defeat. So the proper aim for Russia is the break up the collective security, contribute to the election of Russia friendly candidates that may allow another Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. A pact that would give Russia a free hand on Ukraine and Baltic States. Our political and military leaders have vowed to not repeat the mistake of 1939-1940 and resist, but will this wove would be kept knowing of low or confused support from other countries. In the end Europe again could divert to situation of 5th-19th century when it was a collection of warring rivaling countries and brief alliances. In such situation for a country with less than 1 million people and weak economy and army has no place for existence. Latvia can only exist with strong united friendly Europe and strong supportive US. And weak Russia. It’s doubtful Russia and Latvia would ever achieve mutual friendship. So if Latvia cannot attain a concrete support from its western partners it’s doomed to lose at least its sovereignty to Russia.  This will be the challenge for this country for next two years.

Latvian inner political and economic weakening

 

Last year when talking about year 2015 I predicted the rise of nationalistic-isolationist populist government forming in Latvia itself. In result a government lead by Māris Kučinskis from Green Party and Latvian Farmers Party alliance was formed in early 2016. Māris Kučinskis with his lack of English skills keeps low profile in foreign gatherings, but his profile as Prime Minister is also very low profile. While he can be praised for being calm of steel nerves he also quite lethargic and has lead his government into flow of scandals and mishaps without affecting much of himself. The main points of conflicts in Latvian interior policy was grand issues with State Revenue Service and raise of taxes for small enterprises. In the spotlight of this is Daina Reizniece-Ozola a Finance minister a chess champion and a flashy talker. All year we saw her battling the corruption in State Revenue Service and taking sharp criticism for poorly managed raise for taxing the small enterprises. The latter issue brought to a bitter conflict with coalition partner liberal Unity (Vienotība) and even brought to a danger of collapse of government. So far the danger was averted and how long this inept government continues to exist remains to be seen.

On political ratings scale (as much of these ratings reflects the real political opinion is always a question) it has been successful for pro-Kremlin Harmony party (Saskaņa) Green Farmers and National Alliance and misfortune for liberal Unity. Unity lost its leading position gained since 2008, after poorly managed inner party coup that lead to collapse of Laimdota Straujuma government. Unity ratings went downhill and its long standing leader Solvita Āboltiņa had to resign from party leadership. Ex EU commissar Andris Piebalgs the new party leader tries to restore the parties fading image and power. Right now Unity’s poll rating is above 5% that would make a miserable fraction in newly elected parliament. Harmony party rating is 17%, Green Party about the same and National Alliance 7%. Plus the eccentric MP’s Artuss Kaimiņš party KPV and two elected small parties Latvian Regional Alliance and To Latvia from Heart is lagging behind 5% looking to take Unities votes.

If this continues there is a great chance of future Latvian government without a liberal party. Either its share of power would be minimal or it won’t be represented at all. There is a small chance that another liberal party called “For Prosperity of Latvia” (Latvijas Attīstībai) might take Unities place but that depends how its leader Juris Pūce would fair in Riga municipal election against incumbent Harmony party mayor Nils Ušakovs. Ušakovs who leads the capital city with scandals, failed street restoration projects and future projects facing major protests, who still has large support base mainly from Russian speakers, however his image is tainted by his offensive remarks towards Latvians and open support for Kremlin policy. But, knowing the population base in Riga he still has high chance to get clear third term as mayor of Riga.  Harmony party meanwhile in parliament functions as opposition party and supports the coalition when it’s bargained. Green Farmers and National Alliance as for now would not consider them in government at least for now.

In security policy Latvia seems to be doing well. The President Raimonds Vējonis an ex-minister of Defense is good negotiator with NATO so as the current Defense Minister Raimonds Bergmanis. An important step this year was the NATO’s decision to store permanent NATO’s international battalion in Baltic States and Poland. Lucky for Latvia the head of forces stored in Latvia will be Canada that has always been loyal to the principles of NATO and has taken part in many operations across the world. Of course the governments and policies can always change. Some people may say that these merely thousand troops would provoke and threaten Russia. First of all Russia has some 30 thousand troops stored in Kaliningrad region alone and these forces will be combined into 30th army next year. Russia has stored nuclear capable missiles in this region, plus the Russian forces who are constantly drilled for attack situations in Pskov and Leningrad region are in thousands. While this international battalion and all three Latvian armies would create a great losses for Russians in case of invasion in the Baltic Sates; they are useless for attacking Russia, so who these forces actually provoke Russia is what people saying these things cannot provide no explanation. While this small NATO force is no match for greater Russian armies, it serves as buffer; should one of its soldiers die from Russian hands it would provoke a conflict. However, every soldier and general serves the politician – as we talked here before – its Russian goal to defeat the West on political level before defeating it on military level. Weak politicians mean weak military in the Western world. So this rather small NATO force in Latvia by its means serves as no guarantee to our security and independence.

Latvian economy has been stagnating for last few years. While Latvia did made a tremendous recovery from 2008-2009 crisis by painful austerity policies, the continuation of these policies are rather stagnating economy that might start to enter decay next year. The overall economic and political climate is passively negative and opens door for populist political manipulations. For this reason a future without liberal party is possible. Latvia could be either ruled by alliance of populist right-wing conservatives and nationalists or it can be ruled by pro-kremlin forces. The next year’s municipal elections will show how strong are ruling parties and how strong is pro-Kremlin Harmony. Harmony could take over more cities in Eastern Latvia and the second biggest city Daugavpils that despite its Russian speaking minority has never had a Harmony mayor. For fading liberal Unity the only chance is to use the weaknesses of their conservative foes in the government and act as inner opposition that is doing now slightly successfully and try to achieve great results in Riga and other cities. Rather dangerous move is to bring down the government that again could lead to unforeseen consequences.

The challenge of 2017-2018

 

Some say history goes in circles and one wave replaces another. A wave of liberalism, multiculturalism in Europe and US seems to have dwindled and new wave of nationalism, isolationism and populism has taken its strength. To those who support this wave following lines are not of concern and they can stop reading this article. For those who fear this wave hear the following words. Stand your ground to this wave and don’t let it bring you down. Question, protest and resist policies made against collective security and seeking common ground with Russia. To seek a common ground with Russia as it has emerged today would be same as making common ground with Nazi Germany. It will be another Munich agreement in far worse consequences. Convince people to go to elections. Many of the populist voters are hard to convince as they vote by their emotions rather than reason. As more people avoid elections the higher chance for populists to gain upper hand. The US elections showed how crucial was the number of absent voters. Also support your army every way possible. When surrounded by militant forces calls for pacifism and unreasonable criticism of the home military brings no fruits. There are no civilians in the war for these forces. Question everything that comes from Russian or pro-Russian news outlets, as deception that turns into truth is their main instrument. Question everything that is in the social nets and even from your trustful state TV or relatives or friends. The amount of propaganda and disinformation these days would make Dr. Goebbels role in his grave. Do not give in to threats by terrorists and enemy armies by submitting to their demands or just give empty #standwithyou styled condolences. The time for that has passed. Empty words and hashtags have no power. Resilience and relentless to all the threats and dangers are the one that enemy fears off. Weakness it what it seeks and we cannot give him that weakness.

 The future for Latvia and neighboring countries has become more unclear and shady more than ever. Either Latvia would continue as independent prosperous country that gives others a reason to respect it and stand for it or it will become a pariah state that would be seen as expendable to other countries in the world. The war is what we fear the most. Riga could also turn into Aleppo if enabled so. In the end the war would determine if this nation has deserved and secured its position as independent country or it will go down in the annals of history as another lost kingdom succumbed by outside forces. If we will reach November 18 2018 with this warning as not fulfilled then the words said in this in this article would had reached their purpose.

Comments Off on Latvia 2016: The Gathering Storm

Filed under Current Events

VEF: The Illustrated History

vef_soviet

VEF stands for State Electrotechnical Factory (Valsts Elektrotehniskā Fabrika). From 1919 to early 1990’s it was one of the biggest and most successful state enterprises in Latvia. Its main production was radios, telephones, Automatic Telephone Exchanges, and various electronic gadgets. In first 20 years of its existence it also produced Minox mini photo camera’s and even airplanes. In independent Latvia VEF was example of industrial recovery after the WWI and was highly regarded by the state and society. After WWII when Latvian was occupied by Soviet Union, the Soviet industrial policy makers saw the potential of the VEF and turned into one of the main radio and telephone producers in whole Soviet Union. VEF was not just a major factory it was also a social and cultural service a symbol of the state prosperity. During Soviet occupation Latvia was one of the most industrialized Soviet republics. It had its major backdrop – high workforce immigration that become crucial in late 80’s. During process of regaining independence the VEF leadership and workforce was divided in their views. While many supported the independence, others had their doubts how the VEF would survive the transition to capitalism and separation from the Soviet market.  These doubts proved to be true: the VEF leadership and the state government mismanaged the privatization process and VEF fell into bankruptcy. The breakdown of the Soviet market, VEF secret connections with  Soviet military industry, failure to enter western market and finding western investors lead to collapse. Hundreds of jobs were lost and factories abandoned. Today few companies and basketball club bear the name of VEF. VEF remains as symbol of the state industrial history.

The history in VEF has been discussed in this site before. This article is rather illustrative representation of history of VEF using illustrative material from official VEF publications, memoirs and TV broadcasts. Article aims to show VEF greatest achievements during the interwar period and Soviet period and its demise at the end of the 20th century.

VEF main montage corpus at the Brīvības gatve 19

VEF main montage corpus at the Brīvības gatve 216

On April 1919 as Postal and Telegraph Department’s repair workshops were established in Riga. During that time Riga was controlled by Latvian Socialist Soviet government. However, month later Soviets fled the capital city and workshops were taken over by Republic of Latvia government. The equipment was brought by Soviets from Tver in Russia. During 1915-1916 much of the industrial equipment was evacuated to Russia anticipating the German capture of Riga. The workshop was located in Post and Telegraph building in Aspazijas bulvāris 5 (now home for economic and history faculties). It also became home for Radio Latvia. As the workshop produced more equipment and required more workforce and work space it needed new location. At first on 1924 it was moved to Slokas iela 2 to five story lombard building (now State History Archive). Finally on 1928 the workshops were moved to abandoned buildings of Russian-German factory “Union”. “Union” was electrotechnical factory founded by German citizen Henrich Detman who on 1887 bought a plot of land near Pskov freeway at edge of the city. On 1899 designed by architect Henrich Shiel a marvelous neo-renaissance style building with sculpture of Zeus was built. More new buildings were built around it as the enterprise prospered. On 1915 the company along with its 3000 people were evacuated to Kharkiv.  The company was transformed in to Kharkiv Electromechanical company that still works today.

Former “Union” buildings became ideal place for new state electrotechnical company. On 1929 the Postal and Telegraph company workshops were called the State Electrotechnical factory “Pērkons” (Thunder). Three years later it was renamed simply as State Elektrotechnical Factory – Valsts Elektrotehniskā Fabrika – VEF.

The main factory corpus at the former German-Russian company "Union" at Brīvibas iela 214

The main factory corpus at the former German-Russian company “Union” at Brīvibas gatve 216. Atop the tower a neon sign VEF was installed.

Areas around VEF became highly populated by its workers

Areas around VEF became highly populated by its workers

VEF workforce

VEF workforce

Material storage

Material storage

Extrusion workshop

Extrusion workshop

Material cutter

Material cutter

Extrusion process for creating chassis ans splinters necessary for radio production

Extrusion process for creating chassis ans splinters necessary for radio production

Automatic extrusion presses

Automatic extrusion presses

Workshop for creating extrusion tools

Workshop for creating extrusion tools

Cutting machine and hand polishing machine

Cutting machine and hand polishing machine

VEF steel oven and sharping machine for cutting tools

VEF steel oven and sharping machine for cutting tools

Turning bench workshop

Turning bench workshop

Turnery

Turnery

Automatic turner. The size parts are measured by the microscopes

Automatic turner. The size parts are measured by the microscopes

Cadmium baths for parts and tools

Cadmium baths for parts and tools

VEF abatement oven. Yielding pulling machine

VEF abatement oven. Yielding pulling machine

Wire spining machine

Wire spining machine

Bakelite workshop

Bakelite workshop

Elements workshop

Elements workshop

Zinc bottom pole soldering machine

Zinc bottom pole soldering machine

Zinc pole casing soldering machine

Zinc pole casing soldering machine

Parts workshop

Parts workshop

Transformer coil spining

Transformer coil spining

Transformer measurement equipment. Capacitor thickness measuring

Transformer measurement equipment. Capacitor thickness measuring

Making condensers

Making condensers

Plywood factory for creation for enclosures

Plywood factory for creation for enclosures for radios

Enclosure workshop

Enclosure workshop

Polishing workshop

Polishing workshop

Polisher polishing the enclosures

Polisher polishing the enclosures

Assembling workshop

Assembling workshop

Equipment tuning

Equipment tuning

Assembling the loudspeakers

Assembling the loudspeakers

Radio casing and final check up

Radio casing and final check up

Products are being packed and sent to storage

Products are being packed and sent to storage

Electrical measurement laboratory

Electrical measurement laboratory

Measurement of the sound distortion and receiver calibration

Measurement of the sound distortion and receiver calibration

Measuring the sensitivity and selectivity of the receiver

Measuring the sensitivity and selectivity of the receiver

Material testing laboratory

Material testing laboratory

Special measurement equipment workshop

Special measurement equipment workshop

Radio transmitter in Klaipēda, Lithuania assembled by VEF

Radio transmitter in Klaipēda, Lithuania assembled by VEF

VEF made radio transmitter

VEF made radio transmitter

Transmitter "turning field"

Transmitter “turning field”

Radio beacon for transmitting timed interval signals

Radio beacon for transmitting timed interval signals

VEF Radio Branch library

VEF Radio Branch library

Factory sales bureau

Factory sales bureau

VEF store in Estonia

VEF store in Estonia

VEF stores in Finland and Estonia

VEF stores in Finland and Lithuania

During the interwar period VEF produced mainly radios, telephones and telephone exchange systems that were installed in Riga and other major cities.  Factory produced all electronics that had any market demand – communication devices, phones, light bulbs, cameras, irons, radios, flashlights, as well as photo paper, work-tables, and even airplanes. On 1936 VEF became famous across the world with its Minox subminiature camera designed by Walter Zapp was first of its kind.

On 1940 Latvia was occupied and VEF was nationalized by Soviet government. While some of the factory executives and workers faced repressions, the factory continued its usual work until June 22 1941 when Latvia was invaded by Nazi Germany. Factory was managed by Nazi authorities but was in decay. On 1944 following Nazi retreat from Riga, factory was looted and several buildings were destroyed.

Soviet government made great efforts to restore pre-war factories and VEF became part of enormous Soviet industrial sector. Soviet policy was to assign specialization for its many republics. Latvia became the main producer of radios, telephones and other electronic equipment. Such industry never fully developed in Estonia and Lithuania. Closest rival to VEF and  Radiotehnika was Minsk Radio Factory and several factories in Russia. VEF radio design was so good it was adopted by Minsk and other radio factories in the Union. Radiotehnika was other main radio producer in Latvia that produced more advanced radio receivers, however VEF became the most popular. VEF products were imported to Soviet satellite states  and Western Europe. The five largest state companies were VEF, Radiotehnika, Alfa, Komutators and Elar (which produced components for the other four). In its peak in 1991, VEF employed 20,000 people. However, part of the production went for soviet military needs. Latvian industry greatly boosted the Soviet economy. According to latest researches Latvia as Soviet republic made greater payments for other Soviet republics then Moscow actually invested for Latvia. The fact that Soviet government overextended the Latvian industry brought to need of workforce from other Soviet republics. VEF working force was multi ethnic of Latvians, Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Jews, ect. As before the war, the VEF was highly regarded as pillar of state economy and became symbol of Soviet Latvian industry.

vef_ww2_monument

Georgijs Gaile was the first post war factory director

Georgijs Gaile was the first post war factory director

Soviet newspaper Komsolovska Pravda reports patriotic VEF campaigns to reach over production

Soviet newspaper Komsolovska Pravda reports patriotic VEF campaigns to reach over production

VEF old block during Soviet era. Soviets built more new buildings around pre-war area

VEF old block during Soviet era. Soviets built more new buildings around pre-war area

Radio workshop

Radio workshop

From 1945 to 1960 VEF produced lamp radio receivers. On 1961 VEF produced "Spīdola" transistor radio one of the first in Soviet Union (below left).

From 1945 to 1960 VEF produced lamp radio receivers. On 1961 VEF produced “Spīdola” transistor radio one of the first in Soviet Union (below left).

VEF 206 (left) became one of the most popular export products. VEF Sigma (above left) was one of the most popular radio-cassete players in Soviet block

VEF 206 (left) became one of the most popular export products. VEF Sigma (above left) was one of the most popular radio-cassete players in Soviet block

Over the decades various models were made. On late 80's the radio models had stereo sound and FM band

Over the decades various models were made. On late 80’s the radio models had stereo sound and FM band

VEF made creative ways to advertise their products. Author of the photo unknown.

VEF made creative ways to advertise their products. Author of the photo unknown.

vef_radio_cehs0001

Mass production of radio cassette player models

vef_telefon

VEF made telephones in 50’s

Soviet built building for telephone production

Soviet built building for telephone production

VEF Telephone production

VEF Telephone production

In 80's the round dials were replaced with button dial and telephones became more advanced

In 80’s the round dials were replaced with button dial and telephones became more advanced

Manufacturing the Automatic Telephone exchanges

Manufacturing the Automatic Telephone exchanges

ATE measuring and testing

ATE measuring and testing

vef_atc0001

vef_atc0002

vef_atc0004

Production of conveyors. automatic assembly lines and other production items

Production of conveyors. automatic assembly lines and other production items

VEF also attempted to use robots for mass production

VEF also attempted to use robots for mass production

While still lacking behind western industry the VEF reached great level technical advancement

While still lacking behind western industry the VEF reached great level of technical advancement

Early computers were also used by VEF

Early computers were also used by VEF

A large dictionary would be needed to list all notable VEF workers and executives

A large dictionary would be needed to list all notable VEF workers and executives

vef_kruminsh

vef_boss

vef_vefietis

VEF was always closely watched by the Soviet Communist party

VEF was always closely watched by the Soviet Communist party

VEF made contacts with counterparts in Eastern Block. Ideas were exchanged.

VEF made contacts with counterparts in Eastern Block. Ideas were exchanged.

While VEF did not made much contacts with leading Western producers some contacts were made with Asian countries

While VEF did not made much contacts with leading Western producers some contacts were made with Asian countries

VEF was not just a major factory. It offered a vast social welfare possibilities for its workers.  VEF run sanatoriums, kindergartens, sports schools and Palace of Culture and Technology. Being a worker for VEF meant to be member of special social caste who received many advancements and privileges.

Special sanatorium for VEF workers and their family members

Special sanatorium for VEF workers and their family members

Inside the VEF sanatorium

Inside the VEF sanatorium

VEF Pioneer organization

VEF Pioneer organization

vef_pioners

"Vefietis" public catering center located next to new soviet built VEF blocks was one of the most advanced in Latvia. Now demolished

“Vefietis” public catering center located next to new soviet built VEF blocks was one of the most advanced in Latvia. Now demolished

vef_shop0001

vef_shop0002

vef_vorkerrs_exersise

vef_sportsman

vef_gimnast2

VEF Palace of Culture and Technology located near central VEF complex was place of various cultural activities

VEF Palace of Culture and Technology located near central VEF complex was place of various cultural activities

VEF palace had library, young technicians learning center and artist workshop

VEF palace had library, young technicians learning center and artist workshop

VEF Palace hosted worker meetings, had VEF history museum and own choir

VEF Palace hosted worker meetings, had VEF history museum and own choir

1989 VEF marks its 70 birthday. VEF veteran A. Bērziņš in charge for finding and creating parts for Minox camera gets awarded

1989 VEF marks its 70 birthday. VEF veteran A. Bērziņš in charge for finding and creating parts for Minox camera gets awarded

VEF celebrates its 70 years of work in VEF palace

VEF celebrates its 70 years of work in VEF palace

Layout of the VEF factory complex

Layout of the VEF 32 hectare  factory complex.

Various VEF badges and pins

Various VEF badges and pins

 

On 1989 VEF celebrated its 70 years of work. Around that time the country affected by Perestroika was ridden with protests against increasing industrialization and immigration. What first started as massive environment protection protests turned to major movement demanding restoration of independence and the end of Soviet occupation. Many workers of the VEF joined the movement. Latvian Popular Front established a branch in the VEF factory. Mostly Russian speaking factory workers opposed this and supported the Interfront. On May 1 1989 flag of Latvia was raised above the VEF tower marking the official factory support for independence.   Almost no one was sure at that time and until very August 1991 that independence is fully possible.  And that’s why most did not consider what will happen afterwards the goal would be reached.

VEF supporters of independence gathers to raise the flag of Latvia

VEF supporters of independence gathers to raise the flag of Latvia

VEF workers in protest. The protest banner reads "Against immigration"

VEF workers in protest. The protest banners reads “Against immigration!”

Flag of Latvia raised above VEF tower

Flag of Latvia raised above VEF tower

vef_lv_karogs0002

 

Situation for VEF started to went downhill in 1991-1993. The Soviet market had collapsed, the connections with Soviet military was lost. VEF leadership failed to find efficient ways to enter Western market. In many ways the VEF production was already outmatched by western counterparts. The government instead  of slow transition from communism to capitalism choose to allow the privatization of all state industrial enterprises. There was limited interest from foreign investors and the VEF leadership could not determine their new worth according to Western standarts. A decision was made to split the large VEF enterprise in several smaller companies. One by one these companies entered bankruptcy.   In next decade VEF disintegrated; most factories were abandoned, some small companies bearing VEF name survived. Most successful is VEF Radiotehnika RRR that was born in uniting with Radiotehnika that also suffered major crisis after independence. Few other companies produced phones and electrical equipment but are too small to compete the western importers. VEF products soon became obsolete. The telecommunications provider Lattelecom choose foreign technology for new modern communications service. All governmental services  ordered new foreign equipment and did gave any chance for VEF to modernize. VEF radios and telephones were obsolete in 10 years and now can be found as relics in flea markets and antique shops. Could VEF survived the transition and transformed into new modern company remains a open question. Some say that VEF breakdown was favored by rival companies who wanted to exclude it from free market. Others say that VEF breakdown was result of poor management, in which one blames another for their mistakes. VEF breakdown could also be inevitable – there was too many unfavorable factors that it simply could not survive in 90’s crisis. Similar fate awaited almost every major factory in Latvia. The breakdown of the industrial sector is the most crucial social disaster in Latvian history.

Crisis begins. No pays means empty factory with nothing but the birds

Crisis begins. No pays means empty factory with nothing but the birds

Workshops abandoned

Workshops abandoned

Workers still try to do their jobs while the pays are delayed

Workers still try to do their jobs while the pays are delayed

Last generation VEF phones

Last generation VEF phones

VEF workers gathers in protest

VEF workers gather in protest

vlcsnap-2016-11-17-15h29m54s870

Initial strong support for independence was now shadowed by strong disappointment as decades of work was lost

Initial strong support for independence was now shadowed by strong disappointment as decades of work was lost

The leader of the Latvian Social Democratic Workers Party Juris Bojārs tried to stand up for workers with little success

The leader of the Latvian Social Democratic Workers Party Juris Bojārs tried to stand up for workers with little success

Desperate call for government to save the VEF and do not be grave diggers of own state

Desperate call for government to save the VEF and do not be grave diggers of own state

Most factory buildings soon became abandoned

Most factory buildings soon became abandoned

Factory equipment was either sold or stolen

Factory equipment was either sold or stolen

Some abandoned spaces as this sometimes is used to events such as markets or museum nights

Some abandoned spaces as this sometimes is used to events such as markets or museum nights

The main assembly building is used by Goodwill nightclub. On the tower a ham radio transmitter is installed for local UHF radio club

The main assembly building is used by Goodwill nightclub. On the tower a ham radio transmitter is installed for local UHF radio club

This corpus where VEF airplanes were assembled was ruined for many years. Now is in the process of being restored

This corpus where VEF airplanes were assembled was ruined for many years. Now is in the process of being restored

Former VEF factory yard

Former VEF factory yard

10678709_697553683656538_7122699215844544283_n

Some former VEF buildings are now used by companies, shops, clubs, even religious organizations. Some still remains abandoned and sometimes are used by artists for their exhibits and workshops

Stairway in abandoned VEF building

Stairway in abandoned VEF building

Largest VEF factory building now serves as Domina Supermarket

Largest VEF factory building now serves as Domina Supermarket

The historic VEF building has been taken over by Latvian company Mikrotiks and has been renovated

The historic VEF building has been taken over by Latvian company Mikrotiks and has been renovated

VEF palace of culture kept his function as place for various cultural festivities and was home for VEF history museum. Since 2016 its been under renovation

VEF palace of culture kept his function as place for various cultural festivities and was home for VEF history museum. Since 2016 its been under renovation

A full worded history of VEF remains to be written.  The pictures speak for themselves and they speak a thousand words of former glory and demise. Its doubtful VEF would ever be restored to what it was 25 years before. The preservation of the industrial heritage is important goal for our and future generations. 25 years after the demise of VEF its starting to become another subject of social memory about Latvian soviet and industrial past. Often full of myths so its important to preserve the history of the VEF, its workers and products they made. This article was dedications to all of them and I hope it will contribute to the memory and research about the VEF.

 Sources:

VEF. Radio fotoattēlos. Rīga : Valsts elektrotehniskā fabrika, [1935].

 Каталог / Рижское ордена Ленина и Октябрьской революции производственное объединение ВЕФ имени В. И. Ленина. Рига, 1987.
Bražis, Ivars, Minoksa mantinieki / Ivars Bražis ; redaktore / korektore un tekstu tulkotāja Alīna Melngaile. Rīga : Zvaigzne ABC, 2013

Deviņdesmitie. Privatizācija. Piķis un papīrīši. 2016 – Dokumentālās filmas

http://spoki.tvnet.lv/foto-izlases/Bijusi-VEF-eka-tgd-drupas/69338/1/2

http://nickwidescreen.livejournal.com/2245121.html?thread=2671873

Comments Off on VEF: The Illustrated History

Filed under Historical Articles

Latvia and Ukrainian People’s Republic

unr

1920 map of claimed lands by Ukrainian People’s Republic. Note: Eastern Ukraine – Galicia and Lviv has been already to Poland.

Ukrainian People’s Republic (Українська Народна Республіка УНР or UNR) was first modern Ukrainian national statehood that existed between 1917 and 1921. Similarly to Belarusian People’s Republic (BNR) it did not survive the tides of war, however contrary to BNR, UNR received greater support and recognition from Latvia. Latvian officers also took part in UNR national forces and both sides had high hopes towards each other. On 1920 as Ukraine was divided between Soviet Russia and Poland in pursue for peace with Soviets, Latvia had to abandon its support for UNR. Article highlights Latvian – Ukrainian diplomatic relations and Latvian participation in UNR armed forces.

On March 17 1917 after the collapse of Russian Empire Central Council of Ukraine (Українська Центральна Рада UCR) was established in Kyiv. One of its main demands was national autonomy that was not supported by Russian Provisional Government in Petrograd. In response Ukrainian national forces under the command of General Pavlo Skoropadskyi started to assemble to defend Ukrainian sovereignty. On October 25 (November 7) Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd and their supporters took over some areas in Ukraine. UCR managed to control much of Ukraine and on November 7 (November 20) the Ukrainian People’s Republic was proclaimed. Meanwhile in Kharkiv on December 11-12 1917 Ukrainian Soviet Republic was founded. Bolsheviks advanced and gained control over much of Ukraine and on February 8 captured Kyiv. Chief Otaman Symon Petliura who commanded UCR armed forces faced gruesome defeat at the battle of Kruty where Ukrainian 1st Student company and Cadet Corps suffered great casualties. On January 9 (22) UNR again proclaimed full independence and severed all ties with Russia. On February 9 in Brestlitovsk UNR signed peace treaty with Germany and Austria-Hungary gaining their military support in return for food provisions. German forces entered Ukraine and on March 1 captured Kyiv. On March 3 Soviet Russia ceded Ukraine to Germany in peace agreement in Brestlitovsk. UNR forces of 15 000 men entered Kyiv and Crimea. UNR was recognized by Germany, Bulgaria, Austria-Hungary, Turkey and Great Britain.

Ukraine was taken over by Germans and Austrians who came in early conflict with UCR who protested against German military courts. German authorities formally dissolved UCR. In response UCR proclaimed new leftist leaning UNR constitution. Ukrainian right-wing rushed to prevent Ukrainian-German confrontation and rise of left-wing on April 29 seized power. General Pavlo Skoropadskyi became dictator under the title of Hetman of Ukraine. UNR faced resistance from Bolsheviks and peasants lead by anarchist Nestor Makhno. More countries however recognized UNR such as Finland, Poland, Romania, Switzerland, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway and Persia. As of November 11 1918 when Germany and Austria-Hungary collapsed situation changed in Ukraine. UNR elites supporting Allied powers created Directory lead by Symon Petliura, who in December 14 deposed hetman Skoropadskyi and proclaimed second Ukrainian People’s Republic (during hetman’s dictatorship UNR was called “Ukrainian State”). Meanwhile in Western Part of Ukraine a Western Ukrainian People’s Republic on October 19 1918 was proclaimed in attempts to split from Austria- Hungary who controlled Lviv (Lemberg). On January 1919 it united with UNR. The Western Ukraine with Lviv in center was claimed by Poland and both sides engaged each other in battles until June 1919.

Soviet Russia immediately after German surrender to Allies canceled Brestlitovsk peace agreement and UNR had to declare war on them on January 16 1919. On February 5 Bolsheviks again captured Kyiv and reached Zbruch River west of Ukraine and entered Crimea. Ukrainian peasants and anarchist groups resisted Bolsheviks while un summer of 1919 the monarchist White Guard South Russian Volunteer army lead by general Anton Denikin attacked Bolsheviks and captured Kharkiv on the way to Moscow and on August 31 entered Kyiv. As his forces were defeated and chased away Bolsheviks again took over much of Ukraine in March 1920.

Situation demanded an alliance with Poland that was reached by Symon Petliura. On April 26 1920 Polish-Ukrainian forces attacked Bolsheviks on May 7 captured Kyiv. Polish forces reached river Dnipro. Bolsheviks ignited counter offensive and On June 12 Poles abandoned Kyiv, on July 4 Bolsheviks started attack in Belarus and reached Warsaw. On August 12-17 the Bolshevik offensive was finally stopped at the gates of Warsaw. On March 18 1920 in Riga Poland and Soviet Russia signed peace agreement dividing Ukraine in two. Central, South and East Ukraine was granted to Soviets while Western Part of Ukraine including Lviv (Lwov in Polish) was ceded to Poland. Recognized also by Ukrainian delegation the Riga peace agreement was death sentence to UNR. Symon Petliura dismissed Directory and withdraw his forces to Poland where he was interned. Rumania and Czechoslovakia also gained Ukrainian ethnic lands. Symon Petliura lead the UNR in exile until he was assassinated by Soviet agent on 1926. UNR continued to work in exile in Poland until 1939 and the moved to France where it ceased to exist after Nazi occupation. After the war in western exile Ukrainian National Council (Українська Національна Рада) that existed until 1991 when it recognized new Republic of Ukraine that formed in result of collapse of the Soviet Union.

During dramatic and fast changing events in Ukraine during Soviet-Ukrainian war many Latvians were involved army in state matters. Firs before the First World War and during the war some Latvians traveled to live and work in Ukrainian provinces of the Russian empire and secondly the Latvian officers who served the Russian army were sent on duty there. Large numbers of Latvians ended up in Ukraine as refugees during 1915-1916.  Also campaigners for Latvian independence were interested in Ukrainian independence movement and were seeking for cooperation. On September 8-15 (21-28) in Kyiv the UCR organized “congress of the minor nations” where 80 representatives took part along with 10 from Latvia. Latvians were represented by Zigfrīds Anna Meierovics from Vidzeme land council Kristaps Bahmanis from Kurzeme Land council and Staņislavs Kambala from Latgale land council. Z. A. Meierovics gave speech describing the history of Latvian history and present situation and voiced call for Latvian self-determination. Meierovics, Kambala, Bahmanis and lecturer at Kyiv University M Bruninieks were elected in All-Russia Council of Nations. On November 18 1917 in Valka the newly founded Latvian National Council (LNC) also discussed Ukraine and judged that Ukrainian politicians are generally friendly towards Latvians like rest of the small nations. On December the Council received telegram from UNR about their declaration of independence and replied back with warm greetings towards Ukraine and voiced support for Ukrainian freedom and federation of nations.

On January 1918 LNC decided to send representatives to Ukraine to gain support promised by UCR. At first Latvians wanted to travel to Brestlitovsk to take part in Ukrainian-German peace talks to gain things to their favor, however the idea was dropped and Latvian representative K Bahmanis went to Kyiv on February. There he contributed to the creation of Kyiv Latvian Central Committee and spread information about the work of LNC. Because of war activities he could not contact Latvia and his report about his activities was only reviewed in June. Bahmanis became the representative of the Latvian Provisional Government in Kyiv and since 1919 visited new governments in Georgia, Armenia, White Guard Armies in Crimea, Don and Kuban. He returned to Latvia in September 1920.

peteris_radzins

Latvian General Pēteris Radziņš who served in UNR amy

Many Latvians who were at Ukraine decided to join Ukrainian national armed forces lead by General Pavlo Skoropadskyi. Latvian officers also served in Symon Petliura Directory army. Most known was colonel Pēteris Radziņš who was chief of organizational and training department of the General Staff. After hetman was deposed he served as deputy to the chief of General Staff Mykola Yunakiv. On September 1919 escaping UNR defeats against White Guards and Bolsheviks he got himself in Poland and then returned to Latvia. There he was appointed for the Chief of the Commander-in-Chief Staff of the Latvian army. From 1924 to 1928 he was commander-in-chief of the Latvian Army. He also was author of many military history books and died in age of 50 in 1930. Lieutenant Colonel Jānis Ceplītis served Skoropadsyi and then under Petliura was chief of the Operational department of the General Staff and returned to Latvia on December 1919. Captain Pēteris Miķelsons on 1918 voluntarily joined the hetman’s army in the Chief Artillery headquarters and was promoted to lieutenant colonel. In Petliura army he served as chief of Inspectional department of Chief Artillery headquarters. On January 1920 he was retired, but as Ukrainians started attack with Poles he was mobilized again. On 1921 he was promoted colonel and was retired few months later. Collegium  assessor  Vilhelms Klotiņš  joined the hetman’s army on June 1918 and served in Petliura army as administrative colonel the chief of the board of main intendancy money and payments. He returned to Latvia on Summer 1919. Aviator captain Nikolajs Jeske on December 1918 joined Petliura’s army as deputy for the chief 5th aviation division later chief of Proskuriv (now Khmelnytskyi) aviation school and commander of 1st aviation detachment. On 1920-1921 he was the head of UNR aircraft purchase commission.  Staff captain Hermanis Klīve on December 1918 served in hetmans army but after coup he was sent to court as hetmans officer but was found not guilty. He then served Poltava regiment until March 1920. Podporuchik Kārlis Drengeris served in UNR army 3th detached engineer battalion until September 1920. Podporuchik Arnolds Drukēvičs from December 18 to May 1919 served in UNR 7th artillery brigade and was captured by Poles. Adrejs Lejasslauss on 1918 took important posts in hetmans Provisions ministry and after coup served Provisions ministry in Galicia and Bukovina later in Ministry of Economics as vice-director Leather industry department and later director. Kārlis Brože served in most effective UNR unit the 1 Cavalry Regiment of Black Zaporizhians as commanders deputy, later in Latvia he served in police and municipalities.

As of diplomatic relations the first contacts between Latvia and UNR  emerged on spring 1919 in Paris Peace Conference. UNR as most politically unstable country of the time was mainly interested in gaining support from Latvia. The Latvian foreign minister Z. A Meierovics considered Ukraine as ally and wanted to include Belarus and Ukraine into Baltic entente that compromised Baltic Sates, Finland and Poland. Belarusian and Ukrainian delegations took part in Dorpat (Tartu) Baltic states conference as observers. In meetings with them it was agreed to create a common military alliance. On September 1 1919 UNR consul Nikifor Bederovsky arrived in Riga. The UNR consulate managed to get some Ukrainians in Latvian army to retire and join the UNR army. Along with new UNR citizens some were Germans as consul deputy Erich Fleisher who asked Latvian General staff to command him to Jelgava for “consulate affairs” on November 28 1919 (Jelgava was just liberated from Bermont-Avalov army) and was granted. His goal was to search for UNR citizen local German Heinnrich Brade who voluntary joined Baltic Landguard on July 14 during his duty in Riga Latvian soldiers confiscate his bicycle that became point of active communications between consulate and Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Fleisher himself was local German.

Latvia and UNR consulate sometimes entered situations of conflict during siege of Riga on October-November 1919. On October 24 UNR consulate filed a request to give back horse that was confiscated to consulate coachman Mykola Jukatch however was denied. In result UNR together with Belarus, Lithuania and Estonia filed nota to Foreign ministry where it protested against search-ins in one of the consular buildings and car confiscation by Latvian army and expulsions and mobilizations of their citizens.  The nota demanded to make assertive steps until 8 December 12:00 or else the consulates will inform the representatives of Etente and make similar steps towards Latvian citizens in their territory. UNR was concerned by significant flow of refugees of Ukrainian nationals from Russia into Latvia. Latvian Foreign Ministry mostly supported the consulate and even gave it a credit for refugee transit and organization of the courier service.

Latvia and UNR also had numerous contacts in other countries. In London, Great Britain Latvian representative Georgs Bisenieks and UNR counterpart Yaroslavl Olesnitsky made regular meetings informing each other of the military events in both countries. In Warsaw, Poland the Latvian representative Atis Ķeniņš considered an establishment with UNR a top priority. He reported to Prime Minister Kārlis Ulmanis that Ukrainians eagerly wants to make friends with Latvia from whom they want to receive support such as military instructors and aides for economic recovery. Ukrainians also hoped that after liberation of Daugavpils, Ukraine could receive a transit of clothing, shoes and ammunition for its army of 200 000 men. Atis Ķeniņš in talks with Ukrainian side suggested that Latvian Provisional government needs to send emissary to Kyiv. On December 10 1919 the head of UNR directory Symon Petliura with UNR foreign minter A.Lvicky gave nota to Keniņš in Poland where they recognized Latvian independence and their Provisional Government.

On January 2 1920 Volodomir Kedrosky arrived in Riga to establish UNR diplomatic mission. The diplomatic mission was located at Antonija iela 6 (presently within the territory of the Russian embassy). In spring a UNR press bureau was established that informed Latvian press about military and political events in UNR. UNR expected that Latvia will recognize their independence in return without delay. However, Latvian priority was to gain acceptance from Poland first as both countries shared important military ties and shared common border. Only after Latvian –Polish relations suffered brief deadlock after failed talks in Warsaw in March 1920 on March 25 Z. A. Meierovics sent nota to Symon Petliura where he recognized UNR independence. Polish emissary Bronislav Boufal expressed disappointment and call it a result of change in relations between Poland and Latvia. A. Meierovics explained his policy in People’s council on March 10 where he rejected Polish demand to restore the Polish borders of 1776 that would include Belarus and Ukraine. He instead accented the need for sovereign countries in Belarus and Ukraine and reviewed the UNR situation as difficult regarding its relations with Soviet Russia who is not looking for peace with UNR and instead has created a rival Ukrainian Soviet Republic. Polish society was generally against Ukrainian and Belarusian independence while Polish government including General Jozef Pilsudsky was cautiously supportive. Meanwhile UNR military representative in Poland colonel general Viktor Zelinsky asked Latvian military representative Mārtins Hartmanis to support the transfer of Ukrainian soldiers within former units of Yudenich White Guard army stationed in Alūksne to Ukraine including Belarusian general S. Bulak-Balahovich of whose 884 men 24% were Ukrainians. While Latvian side expressed support the UNR mission in Riga was not interested and did not make any contacts with Latvian General Staff. As joint Polish and Ukrainian offensive started Latvian side asked to find out if within soviet prisoners of war there are Ukrainians who could be sent to UNR and found 11 men. However, UNR diplomatic mission did not respond.

On June 2 1920 in Vinnytsia UNR governmental declaration stated that it’s in most importance to have good neighboring relations with Romania and gain most positive agreement with solidary Baltic States. For that reason on June 2 all Latvian citizens serving in UNR army were relieved of duty as both countries have recognized each other. In return Latvia promised to work on refugee re evacuation to Ukraine. Latvian government sent the representative of Refugee re-evacuation society to Ukraine Stulmanis who on June 1 arrived in Kovel and June 3 in Zhytomyr  to make talks with Polish military who was widely responsive and then planned to go to Kyiv, but as situation in front quickly changed he was forced to head back to Latvia.

In August 6 1920 in Bulduri the Baltic States conference was opened to discuss foreign affairs between Baltic countries. UNR tried to gain direct entry into conference. Ukrainian and Belarusian people’s republics sent applications and sent a delegation of journalist Alexander Sadikovsky, V, Kedrovsky, A, Shlugin, economist Mykola Dobrilovsky, businessman S, Frankfurt and L, Zadorzhnij. The head of Lithuanian delegation Jons Šaulis on August 19 issued declaration where he expressed concerns over Ukrainian participation as it would cause protest from Soviet Russia and also doubted the need of Ukrainian participation in the Baltic States conference. Lithuanians however, would still participate even if Ukrainians were admitted. On August 20 it was decided that Belarus cannot take part while UNR can take part as full-time member of the conference. UNR issued memorandum about their state history and current demands and interests. On August 31 UNR representatives signed the project for political convention where member states committed for joint de iure recognition and settle their quarrels in a peaceful way. Few days later a military council was made to create a joint military convention (Lithuania stepped out of it for political reasons) UNR representative colonel Danilchuk and lieutenant colonel Didkovsky. The project for military convention was concluded on October 18-30 that had to be approved by all five member states. Both these conventions were never realized.

Month later in September 21 1920 in Riga Poland and Soviet Union came to discuss peace agreement. Also Soviet Ukraine delegation took part. On October 5 a ceasefire was signed after which UNR senator present in Riga V. Sheluhin and chief of the diplomatic mission V. Kedrovsky gave nota to head of the Polish delegation Jan Dabski where they protested that UNR and Polish diplomatic relations were not taken into concern and UNR had to take part in peace talks. Same nota was also given to Latvian side. Meanwhile Latvia was concerned over the fate of thousands of Latvian refugees in Soviet controlled Ukraine and decided to start talks with Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic causing UNR protest that reminded of joint independence recognition and that Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic is just puppet regime by Soviet occupants. On February 19 1921 Latvia replied that it always supports the Ukrainian strive for freedom, but the real situation demands to hold talks with power presently in Ukraine. On February 21 1921 UNR diplomatic mission left Latvia and closed the consulate. On May 1921 both Latvian and Ukrainian Socialist Soviet representatives met and both recognized each other’s sovereignty. Thus the Latvian and UNR relations were completely canceled even if year later the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic ceased to exist as sovereign state and was included into Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics.

Latvian and Ukrainian relations during 1917-1921 was based on mutual sympathy even more than between Latvia and Belarus. Contrary to Belarussian People’s Republic the UNR had more chances to establish independent nation and therefore received more international support. However, similar to Belarus it could not survive the wars with Soviets, Poles and anarchist warlords. Plus it was disturbed by its own inner power struggle. Had the events for UNR inside Ukraine would be more fortunate the relations between Latvia and UNR would continue in positive environment as contrary to Belarus both countries had no territorial or ethno-political issues. However, Latvian foreign policy was based on realpolitik – after the Polish-Soviet peace agreement ­it was clear that UNR has no more possibility to exist and Latvia moved on to start talks with Soviet Ukraine. As Latvian top priority was to gain peace agreement with Soviets and settle the refugee question. Today Ukraine is top priority to Latvia foreign policy. Latvian policy is to support Ukraine in its struggle against Russia and it does not recognize Russian occupation of Crimea. Both sides supports each other in various way. However, one must always beware from times when fates of many are dictated by realpolitik and survival.

Selected Sources:

Jēkabsons Ēriks. Latvijas attiecības ar Ukrainas Tautas Republiku (1919-1921) Latvijas Vēsture  Jaunie un Jaunākie laiki 2003 4(52)

Miņins, Aldis (2015) Cīņa par varu Krievijas postimpērijas Rietumu perifērijā. 1917-1920

http://garnizonakauss54.blogspot.com/p/pradzins-fotgrafijas.html

Comments Off on Latvia and Ukrainian People’s Republic

Filed under Historical Articles, Uncategorized

US Presidential Elections: Importance for Latvia and Eastern Europe

US_Election_2016.png

Just one week left before the most important political event in United States of America and arguably the rest of the world. An average American voter may think it only matters their own country and interior policy, but US still has responsibility towards many parts of the world especially Baltic States and rest of Eastern Europe. That is why this statement will be more about the election outcome influence on foreign policy and our security. The interior policy and economic issues in these elections is something more important to US citizens themselves then your foreign policy to us which importance inside US is often neglected.

During Cold War years when US policy was always to assure that it will never recognize Soviet occupation of the Baltic States and support anti-soviet resistance; the US presidential candidates often met with Baltic exiles. They also tried to apply to exiles of the Eastern Block and captive nations of the Soviet Union like Ukrainians. Now 25 years after the “end” of Cold War such meetings and reach outs never happen. During presidential debates the question of Ukrainian conflict was never raised and only the question of US support for NATO was mentioned briefly. The current adversary for Baltic States – Russia was only mentioned as in form of Syria and DNC email hacks. Now why Russia is keyword in these elections?

Back in past both US ruling parties have made their ups and downs with Russia/Soviet Union. Franklin Delano Roosevelt conceded Baltic States to Soviet Union, while his successor Harry Truman ignited confrontation to deter further soviet expansion. Republican Dwight Eisenhower warned of the rise of the military industrial complex in result of arms race. Democrat John F. Kennedy did his best to neutralize the Soviet missile threat in Cuba and reached upper hand in arms race. Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat Jimmy Carter attempted to create a détente with Soviet Union which only lead to breakdown after Soviet invasion in Afghanistan. Republicans Ronald Reagan and George Bush used Soviet weakness to win the first Cold War and witnessed the fall of the Soviet Block.

Since then the following US presidential candidates have failed to understand the Soviet successor state – Russian Federation. Bill Clinton hoped for democratic change in Russia and even hoped for partnership. What western powers failed to understand that despite the communist removal from power, the soviet ruling elite or nomenklatura remained in power, but most importantly the Praetorian guard of the Soviet Union – the KGB and Army elite kept their position. They were determined prevent desovietization, prevent the transition to liberal democracy and revenge on US for the breakdown of the Soviet Union. In the end they succeeded to install their member Vladimir Putin an ex KGB Lieutenant colonel, who in his 17 years of rule have returned the so-called “siloviki” to their past prominence. Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy is based on deception, forgery, sabotage and use of outright force when it’s needed.

 Republican George W Bush at first as many did not decode Putin and his government, but later started more assertive approach. During Bush administration despite Russian resistance whole Eastern Europe and Baltic States was admitted to NATO, however Bush did not rush to create constant NATO military presence in the Baltic States. A major Bush and other NATO leaders mistake was not to reach common ground on admitting Ukraine and Georgia into NATO. Germany and France resisted to assign a road map for these countries while Putin openly threatened that Ukraine will only enter NATO without its Eastern and Southern part. To prevent Georgia from joining NATO and EU Russia invaded Georgia, and witnessed impotence from US and EU countries who could not defend Georgia. Some say that US fleet presence in Black Sea was the factor to stop full occupation of Georgia, while other say that French president Nicola Sarkozy managed to make a deal on dividing Georgia and leave Russian occupied territories as unrecognized republics to Russians for the common good. Russian leadership understood that it can be done again in future. As Russia provoked Georgia into attacking first, Georgia was scapegoated and no western sanctions followed. Russia did it first strike, but that was not a wakeup call.

Democrat Barack Obama first 4 years were catastrophic in relations with Russia. At first Obama failed to understand that de iure president Dmitri Medvedev was not de facto and any direct talks with him excluding then Prime Minister Putin would result in nothing. But, the greatest blunder was the so-called “reset” button that then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brought to Moscow. In attempt to normalize relations since Georgian war Clinton gifted the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavror a with a red button with the English word “reset” and the Roman alphabet transliteration of the Russian Cyrillic alphabet word “peregruzka”. Only the word “peregruzka” in Russian means overload. And that is what this attempt of new détente lead to. Obama administration abandoned important plans for rocket defense bases in Poland, Baltic States and Eastern Europe was placed on second plan while Obama sought unrealistic goals for nuclear disarming a thing Russia could not possibly agree. When US and NATO countries entered the civil war in Libya, then prime minister Putin witnessed Gaddafi’s horrible death as direct threat to him and ignited his will to return to Presidential post. As from 2012 scared by unexpected opposition towards his third presidency Putin started a consolidation of power and confrontation with the west, who he blamed for trying to topple his regime and his puppet regimes in Belarus, Ukraine and Central Asia.

 Obama one last mistake towards Russia was the “red line in the sand” – failed promise to make military action against Syrian regime in case of use of chemical weapons. Obama who made this promise unwillingly for himself instead fell for Putin’s intimidation and agreed for deal with Russia and Assad that kept him in power. By doing so he aided popularity for so-called Islamic State (Daesh) radicals and created environment where Russia can directly intervene in Syrian war. Thus Putin no longer recognized Obama as competitive rival. What happened in 2014 in Ukraine we all know. Obama seemingly have learned for their past mistakes. Sanctions are in place and finally what had to be done many years before – a constant NATO military presence is being enforced in Baltic States. In last few months the relations between US and Russia has deteriorated so much that Russia is openly preparing for possible nuclear war and has moved nuclear capable rockets to Baltic region. And that is where the US elections comes in.

Republican party has been taken over by arrogant millionaire who believes he can become a president without any political experience and who leads a fight against so-called establishment. Donald Trump is alarming for Baltic States and Eastern Europe for dozens of things. He suggests that he may only help those countries that pays them enough, practically its gang ransom diplomacy and is against the principles of NATO. Baltic States desperately are trying to balance their national budgets to increase spending for defense, but its obvious that they can’t do it alone. Latvia right now has created a good defense assurance relations with Canada, but if US drops its leading position in NATO it’s a signal towards Russia that it could possibly avoid major war if it decides to tamper with Baltic States. Trump has many times stated sympathies for Putin and his regime and using Russian propaganda slogans in his campaign. He even uses conspiracy theories that first appears in sites like Russia Today and to add he is even endorsed by pro-Russian conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. He has stated that Crimea is “Europes problem” and is better off with Russia, he has removed past Republican promise to send weapons for Ukraine. He states that Russia only fights Daesh and has no problem it with massacring the people in Aleppo with their bombings. Most importantly he pretends that he is not sure if Russia is behind DNC email hack and Russian connection to Wikileaks. He says that CIA and FBI can’t be trusted, however he praises FBI for his new probe into Hillary Clintons emails. Trump himself might not be Russian agent, but his many campaign aids and supporters are and Russia is directly interested in person who may disrupt things on global scale. Russian strategy of divide and conquer is to use western democracy to install Russia friendly regimes in Europe. They have succeeded in Hungary, partly in Slovakia and Greece. Russia supported Brexit in UK and supports right-wing and leftist radicals in Germany, Italy and France. Now Trump is Putin’s greatest gamble that might turn things into his favor. Trump is most unpredictable and dangerous candidate since Barry Goldwater.

Now Hillary Clinton is full of uncertainties too. It’s beyond prediction how her email saga will end, it could end with acquittal or it could end with impeachment. Clinton who pushed the ‘overload’ button now feels the bitter taste of fruits of her failed foreign policy. Russian secret service tries to undermine her election campaign, her intentions of imposing no fly zone in Syria is met with threats of world war. Clinton uses strong words calling Putin the adversary, accusing of Trump of being his puppet and warns of Putin’s intention. We can only hope that if she is elected she will keep up to this and not forgive Russian attack on her campaign. Last thing we need is another “reset” button. But for this reason Clinton cannot be fully trusted.

No matter who will be elected, both of them and all US citizens will have to stand ready for even greater trouble from Russia. First Russia has already ramped up its military presence in Kaliningrad and around Baltic eastern borders. One day it will break up the ceasefire in Ukraine completely when it feels the conditions are perfect for that. Russia is increasing its presence in Syria and provoking NATO into confrontation. If Russia sees that Baltic States are not defended well enough and US lacks leadership to help them it may mount an invasion here.

If Donald Trump will be elected he must certainly feel some gratitude for Putin for contributing for his campaign. Trump will probably again try to make a new détente with Russia, giving her free hand in Syria and limit US presence in Eastern Europe and Baltic States. History teaches that every deal with Russia is not the worth the paper it’s written. Once Trump will witness that Russia endangers his own country a new confrontation will begin. Question – will it not be too late for Baltic States?

If Hillary Clinton is elected and that’s what Russia fears from, the confrontation will continue. If Clinton stays committed to be prime time member of NATO and support Baltic States with military presence it will result in even higher Russian military increase to intimidate her. Question how long Russian economy can hold such arms race­­ – that was one of the reasons why Nazi Germany moved to war in 1939. If Clinton will impose no fly zone in Syria and indict Russia with war crimes then Russia might instigate a crisis situation even involving US casualties. Nerves of steel will be needed to avoid a direct confrontation. Clinton following Obama’s footsteps probably will not arm Ukraine, but keep sanctions. That will not make Ukrainian situation any easier. Lastly Baltic States if ever gets victims of war – then it could happen as consequence of US – Russian conflict in Syria or a last final gamble for Putin’s regime to keep its power prestige and save economy by “short victorious war”.

In both ways the world can expect many dangers after November 8. A dangers that may even went to nuclear war. Russian leadership has nothing to lose. If the regime falls they will lose all their looted millions, mansions and even their lives. They would rather end their existence in war that future Russian generations will blame on foreign powers rather their own leaders and themselves. Russian openly shows its people and the world that is ready even for nuclear war. US and Europe should also tell its citizens its ready for a war with Russia or China if such occurs. We cannot pretend that such threat does not involves us and this 70 year-long peace that was only possible thanks to strong acts of deterrence. In last 25 years the deterrence was naively removed and has caused a greatest global security threat since 1961.

It’s up to US voters to determine the fate of their nation and many other nations. And remember in democratic countries the elections are determined by those who did not vote. …Or Russian hackers. For all US citizens, friends of Latvia, people who study Baltic affairs let this be a warning to make your decision with full responsibility as you will be making history and future for all of us.

Comments Off on US Presidential Elections: Importance for Latvia and Eastern Europe

Filed under Uncategorized

Latvian National Guard: Aizsargi and Zemessardze 1918-1940, 1991-

Left: Latvian Aizsargi Organization badge, left Latvian National Guard emblem

Left: Latvian Aizsargi Organization badge, left Latvian National Guard emblem

On August 23 1991 after failure of Soviet coup attempt Latvia fully restored independence and yet to had begun the restoration of the national armed forces. It was the same situation as in 1918 when the Republic of Latvia was founded – the new nation needed auxiliary paramilitary organization to create order in the new state and defend it against any threat possible. It had serve in every district to preserve state order and help in case of emergency. So Latvia had to create National Guard.  August 23 known in Latvian history  for the Molotov – Ribbentrop pact in 1939 and Baltic Way demonstration in 1989  also became known as the founding day of National Guard in Latvian Zemessardze – “the Landguard”. In many ways they were predecessors of first Latvian National guard the Aizsargi  in Latvian “defenders”, “guardians”. Here is a short survey about both paramilitary organizations, one that played crucial role during first independence and one  that is having crucial role in our national defense.

Members of 9th Madona aizsargi regiment Tirza company

Members of 9th Madona aizsargi regiment Tirza company

Latvijas Aizsargu Organizācija – The Latvian Guards Organization 1918-1940

The collapse of Russian Empire sparked the rise on national independence movements in all Northern and Western parts of former empire. First who founded a paramilitary forces similar to Aizsargi where Fins in 1917. Finland had made tradition of partisan warfare against Russians during Swedish-Russian war when Finland became part of Russia. Large numbers of Fins before 1917 Russian revolution served in imperial German army and afterwards returned to Finland to form guard units to fight for independence, they became part of the new Finland army commanded by general Gustav Mannerheim.  The organization was called Suojeluskunnat – (Protection/Defense corps) known in English as White Guard. In Poland the organization was called Riflemen’s Association (Związek Strzelecki)  based on roots of Jozef Pilsudsky Union of Active Struggle and made from Polish rifleman within Austro-Hungarian army they also made the core for the new Polish army, created a system of military schools and supported the Pilsudsky authoritarian regime.  In Estonia the organization was called Kaitseliit, similar organization was also made in Lithuania.

In Latvia the idea of forming paramilitary organization was made in 1918 by Latvian Minister of Interior Affairs Miķelis Valters in December 16 when he asked all local municipalities to create communal guard squads that would be loyal to the Provisional government. It was needed action however as Bolshevik invasion took and Provisional government abandoned Riga no quick steps were made. On March 20 1919 Provisional government issued “Rules about guardian units in parishes” to create auxiliary police in the country side. At first the enlistment was based on old social class rules and objectives for each member was accustomed to his social level. However, as more territories were liberated from the enemy and were affected by the mobilization all was left in them was old men and very young lads. Interior affairs ministry then removed the social class limitations and made requirements that all men from 18 to 60 years must join the local guard. At first local guard was not entirely auxiliary, but was rather a state imposed practice to install order in rural areas.

The state of war was canceled on February 7 1921, but in border areas was not canceled until October 15 1932. There was no reason now for a compulsory guards organization. The early guards mainly did the police function in areas and did not took part in military actions and did not made the core for Latvian army. During the War for Independence there was other semi-Auxiliary Military unit the Landeswehr  (landguard) that was made mainly from Baltic German volunteers and during war switched sides three times, first served with Latvian army, then fought against it and then was again taken under Latvian control. However, this military unit that took direct part in frontlines is not considered as  root for Latvian national guards. It was disbanded soon after war ended. Latvia needed to form new guard organization that would be based on auxiliary principles.

Latvian Guards Organization or Aizsargi was based on Finnish White Guard. Also the name Aizsargs – defender, guardian was inspired by Fins. Latvians before WW2 viewed Finland as example for Latvia. Finland and Estonia had largest National guard with highest member count. Finland guards had 100 000 members 6,7 % of population, while Estonia 60 000 – 11% of population. Latvian Aizsargi had 45 000 members 3,6 % of population. Contrary to modern national guards, the Aizsargi besides defense and law function also had social and cultural function. Aizsargi had own private property the Aizsargi house where social and cultural gatherings and military courses took place. Such houses were built-in many parts of Latvia. Aizsargi had own libraries and many other extras. Aizsargi was not just paramilitary unit it was mass organization playing high social role in the region. The most members of Aizsargi where from country side and small towns. As their prestige increased it was joined by more people from major cities and higher classes. The organization received funding from Interior Affairs ministry. For some time the state support in Estonia and Lithuania was significantly higher than in Latvia. After authoritarian coup in 1934 the state increased its support. On 1926 state gave 212 503 lats while in 1938 it was now 600 000 lats worth of state support.

Aizsargi also served as partners for Latvian army. During War for Independence around Madona and Jēkabpils the aizsargi served as the “green army” and engaged in partisan warfare against the Bolsheviks. Large numbers of Latvian army veterans after the war joined the Aizsargi. As 60-70% members had military experience the organization became increasingly militant. The new regulations allowed gun carry and keeping guns at home, single variant uniforms, berets and badges and later even medals were introduced. Aizsargi became a second army with rights to practice sport, host events, practice cultural work, organize courses and lectures and raise charity.

Aizsargi were organized in military system – regiments, battalions, companies, squadrons, platoons and detachments. Smaller units acted within the parish borders, while regiments along the districts. Latvian aizsargi 19 regiments. The commanders usually were police chief district with deputy for military matters that usually was officer from the army. The organization was led by experienced military officers like general Ludvigs Bolšteins  (1925-1928) lieutenant colonel Augusts Tone 1928-1930 and general Kārlis Prauls (1930-1940). Independence war veteran general Jānis Balodis served as honorary chairman. While in other countries the guards were subordinated to defense ministry in Latvija aizsargi where subordinated to Ministry of Interior Affairs. Aizsargi had small air units made to educate and prepare pilots. The aizsargi had 28 aircraft mostly biplanes  and 3 sea divisions. There was also railroad support units. Only during late thirties the government started to mechanize aizsargi by making bicycle and motorcycle  units  and gave heavy automobiles and tankette’s.

Aizsargi Air force Gourdon-Leseure (GL-21)

Aizsargi Air force Gourdon-Leseure (GL-21)

At first the society was still skeptical about aizsargi and their role and mission. They had to move from compulsory wartime country police units to organized paramilitary society that functions for the state and society. On 1926 the Latvian Aizsargi Organization gathered in their first congress to discuss the future of the organization and create charter to control and organize the movement. The congress and the new charter was positively regarded  by the society and politicians. Organization started to grow attracting more members. During parliamentary period the aizsargi gained friends and enemies from the political parties. The leftist Social Democrats were always skeptical about giving state funding and fought against their politicization. Another factor that Latvian Social Democratic Workers party also had its own paramilitary organization The Defender and Sport of the Worker (Strādnieka, Sports un Sargs – SSS) nicknamed the locust’s this organization in strength of 1000  members and divided in five battalions and 24 companies were made to defend social democrat demonstrations against radical nationalists and communists and often engaged in street battles. They were armed with low caliber weapons and wore blue color uniforms and had raised right fist salute “Ready to be Free!” as opposed to “Ready to Fight” raised left hand salutes by their nationalist counterparts. The SSS and aizsargi obviously had a rivalry as majority of aizsargi were Latvian ethnic nationalists with only small share of Jewish, German, Russian or Polish members. Also its core members were countryside farmers opposed to social democrat workers and landless peasants therefore they became favorited by Latvian Farmers Union and other right-wing parties. Over the years the Farmers Union gained greater prominence over aizsargi gaining more friction from the social democrats. Meanwhile the SSS and aizsargi also had paramilitary rival organizations like the Zionist Betar and Baltic German youth organizations. While Zionists were loyal to the state, the German paramilitary groups became influenced by Nazism from Germany and became dangerous to the state. As democracy went into decay more radical Latvian nationalists took example and formed Thurdercross movement that tried to be paramilitary party and influence the aizsargi.

May 15 coup 1934 - aizsargi gathers near their headquarters in celebration of the coup

May 15 coup 1934 – aizsargi gathers near their headquarters in celebration of the coup

In situation of economic crisis and political rivalry the aizsargi chose to support Kārlis Ulmanis authoritarian coup in May 15 1934. Kārlis Ulmanis promised the aizsargi leadership increased state support, giving them special status above other citizens. Aizsargi who were present in every district were crucial for the coup to gain control over crucial buildings and arrest all who oppose. The rival social democrat SSS was caught off guard and arrested without a fight. German Nazis and Latvian radical nationalists were also unable to resist. As both Latvian army and Political (Secret) Police accepted or even supported the coup it was bloodless and took place without much interference.

Aizsargi became the new Kārlis Ulmanis Praetorian guard. Their role in civil control increased and they also served as role in ideological control and education. The organization became more bureaucratic and authoritarian and became submitted to the president that became the supreme leader of the organization. From 1936 the president title belonged to Ulmanis and so aizsargi were under his full control. The organization became privileged class as it became the only society in Latvia with right to bear arms and wear uniform. Aizargi members received social and financial benefits. Aizsargi received extended rights to acquire residential property. In next 5 years aizsargi build many clubs, stadiums and other buildings. It had its own major newspaper. The state propaganda regularly praised aizsargi and covered their work. From now on Aizsargi were special state elite much praised and appreciated within the society.

Aizsargi of 8th Valmiera regiment from the right: Kārlis Liepiņš, Pēteris Ulmanis and Jānis Grīnbergs

Aizsargi of 8th Valmiera regiment from the right: Kārlis Liepiņš, Pēteris Ulmanis and Jānis Grīnbergs

However, as the strategical and political situation of Latvia worsened the role of aizsargi became crucial and sadly was wasted. Aizsargi were forced to accept the Latvian – Soviet mutual assistance pact in October 1939 that allowed Soviet garrison in Latvia. Unable to question the Kārlis Ulmanis government’s decisions they were forced to accept the new situation and try to convince the fellow countrymen there is no danger to the independence. Officially the regime pretendent that Latvia is neutral and there is no danger of war, however in case of war the army and aizsargi will still be able to defend Latvian people. On 1940 the Latvian Aizsargi organization had 31 776 members – it was sharp decrease caused by disappointment over governmental actions. The state mobilization plan now just made aizsargi as part of Latvian army only with its own weapons. On June 17 1940 Latvia was in danger of Soviet invasion. The Latvian Aizsargi Organization was still in larger numbers than Latvian army, it was made of patriotic men ready to defend their country. In theory they might produce a prolonged military struggle and partisan warfare against the Soviets. But, their weak point was their leader. Aizsargi were taught to obey the orders of leader Kārlis Ulmanis without question. Kārlis Ulmanis ordered not to resist and signed death sentence to aizsargi, to Latvian Army and to his country. Aizsargi showed no resistance. On June 23 1940 the new Soviet power disbanded the organization. The commander of aizsargi general Kārlis Prauls was sentenced to death and shot in January 30 1941. Many of the senior members and all commanders were deported to Siberia. The story of aizsargi came to sad ugly end during the German invasion in 1941 when Germans assigned the ex aizsargi members to Latvian Auxiliary Police battalions that took part in defense operations, front line battles and punishment expeditions. On 1944 July 22 when Germans needed all the Latvian support to defend the Eastern front the Latvian Aizsargi organization was officially restored. However on January 1 1945 it formally ceased to exist. Germans were encircled in western Latvia, there was no hope for restoration of independence. Aizsargi had made their role as preservers of state order and national symbol, but failed to defend their country.

Latvian National Guards at the parade

Latvian National Guards at the parade

Latvijas Republikas Zemessardze – Latvian National Guard

In 1991 the Latvian government seeking to separate from Soviet Union again had the same issue as of 1918. There was no Latvian Armed Forces, there was major presence of Soviet Armed forces, attacks by the Soviet special force OMON causing victims. The government again needed paramilitary force. First seeds of new national guard was January 1991 when Riga was under threat from Soviet reactionary forces. Barricades were built do defend the main governmental buildings and among the barricade guards many civilians were armed with guns. In case of Soviet attack they were ready to resist with they had. Fortunately the January 1991 turned out less bloody than in Lithuania, however as the threat still stayed the need for new national guard was being discussed.

Only after the failure of the soviet coup attempt on August 21 1991 when Latvia became fully independent and recognized by Russia itself the order for new national guard was issued. On August 23 1991 the new law about Latvian National Guard the Zemessardze was issued. Zemessardze means landguard. The law stated that national guard is auxiliary military civilian self-defense unit. In few months 17 000 volunteers gathered creating 35 territorial battalions.  It was crucial time as police, army, border and rescue services were under restoration.  Every each of them required assistance. Criminality skyrocketed, bandits gained weapons from abandoned Soviet military bases, contraband was on the rise. The new national guard was again crucial to create civil and state order. The early national guard was poorly equipped, had no single uniform. As time went buy the national guard became more organized. Contrary to their predecessors the national guard is part of Latvian Armed Forces and subordinated to the ministry of defense. They don’t have the same rights for property as aizsargi did, nor they can keep weapons at home. This limitation is seen for many as obstacle and was introduced do accustom National guard to the NATO standarts. Also modern-day Latvia has strict gun control laws. On 1992 the youth organization – The Youth Guard or Jaunsargi was established.

Currently the National Guard has 8000 members, in 2015 1210 people joined voluntary. National Guard is divided in 3 regions that each holds at least five battalions. National Guard also have cyber warfare unit, special unit against weapons of mass destruction. National guard uses Carl Gustav m/45 SMG rifles, Heckler & Koch G36, Heckler & Koch G3,  FN MAG G3, RPK, rifles. It has anti air artillery and low caliber field artillery. National Guard has its own distinct insignia and badges and uniforms. The commander-in-chief is brigadier general Leonīds Kalniņš. The goals of the national guard is defend the country, take part in international operations, assist guest military units, preform sapper duties, take part in disaster relief and fire emergencies, and take part in cyber defense.

zemessardze

Today’s National Guards suffer from issues of state funding, recruitment problems, also the support from society is not as high as it was before WW2. However, the Latvian Aizsargi organization before the WW2 was different unit. It was a large organization with private property and self funding, while National Guard is part of Latvian Armed Forces and serves as crucial support unit. One thing remains that the main goal of both organizations is to defend the country and its people. On August 20 during National Guard parade the president of Latvia Raimonds Vējonis said crucial words – during foreign invasion every national guard, soldier and common must defend his country without waiting for orders from commanders in chief. This is in contrary of 1940 when Latvian Army and Aizsargi was in trusting subordination of inept, passive dictator unable to issue orders for resistance. Today Latvia again feels the danger from the same neighbor in the east. Now Latvia has strong allies, but still the ultimate power lays in hands of the Latvian people and their military.

Selected Sources:

Butulis. Ilgvars. (2011) Sveiki Aizsargi. Rīga. Jumava

http://www.zs.mil.lv/lv/Par%20Mums/Vesture.aspx

 

Comments Off on Latvian National Guard: Aizsargi and Zemessardze 1918-1940, 1991-

Filed under Historical Articles

Russian Invasion in the Baltic States: Nightmare or Reality?

Baltic Invasion

Since 2014 the relations between Russia and NATO has reached the levels of Cold War. Russia has annexed Crimean peninsula from Ukraine  and wages proxy war in Eastern Ukraine. Russia has also made intervention into Syrian civil war. Russia has increased arms race and military buildup causing NATO countries to respond. Right now in NATO summit in Warsaw has decided to increase its military presence within Baltic States and Poland by deploying four international battalions in Baltic States under Canadian command while US will deploy 1,000 additional troops in Poland. In so Baltic region will become a NATO war base. This decision will create increase of Russian military near Baltic borders and inside Kaliningrad region. However, since 2013 Russia has already increased its presence and already outmatches and will outmatch the NATO forces in the region. Last two years in Baltic States the social tensions have been increased by the fears of war and Russian invasion. Is this a still far-fetched nightmare created by historic past and inner insecurity or a real threat and does the invasion already taking place by non military means? What are the possible scenarios for Russian invasion? What are the reasons for Russia to invade and not to invade the Baltic States? What consequences it would make for both sides. These questions will be discussed here.

NATO vs Russia. Balance of Military Power in the Baltic Region

Baltic States have population of six million and all three countries suffer from significant depopulation issues. So creating a sizable military force for all three countries is impossible task both financially and by means of manpower. Estonian Defense Forces has 6,500 active officers and 12, 600 in paramilitary Defense League.  In case of war Estonia plans to use 30,000  men and woman. Estonia spends 2,07% for military the required amount by NATO guidelines. Land forces have 2 infantry brigades, infantry is well equipped with NATO, Swedish, Finish and Israeli firearms and special weapons. The army motor pool is currently being expanded and consists mainly of infantry fighting vehicles.  Estonia employs compulsory service. Latvian National Armed Forces have 5, 350 active personnel. In case of war NAF could gather 50, 000 soldiers. Latvian infantry has modern firearms from NATO, Sweden and Israel with bit outdated artillery and only for last two years it has begun supplying its motor pool with infantry fighting vehicles.  Along army the National Guard is a sizable force. Latvian National Forces are currently most underfunded in the region with 1,4% spending on defense. For years the Latvian government has neglected the defense spending and only for last two years are trying to improve the situation. Ādaži training poligon has been improved and regularly hosts foreign troops on rotational training. Lielvārde Airfield has been fixed to host advanced NATO aircraft for landing. Latvian Navy is on path of improvement and is regularly involved in patroling Latvian waters   checking for passing Russian naval vessels. Latvia is the only country in Baltic States with professional military service.  Lithuanian Armed Forces  have  8,120 active land troops with two mechanized infantry brigades. Lithuania has the most advanced vehicle force and artillery. Lithuania has reverted from professional to compulsory service on 2015. The Šiauļai Air Base that hosts NATO Baltic Air Patrol mission is one of the most important military objects in the area. All three countries have small air forces suitable for training, local search and rescue missions and patrolling.

This means that all three countries are heavily reliant on support from NATO allied countries. Closest military ally with significant active force of 120,000 man and woman is Poland with its sizable Air Force and Navy. Polish forces have key importance in securing so-called Suwalki gap, containing Russian forces in Kaliningard and assisting Lithuanian army. Currently there are no constantly present NATO troops in the region. During last two years US, Germany, Poland, UK and other countries have sent their forces for temporary period for training. These mostly brigades and battalions stays in Baltic for few months then head to next assignment. That is about to change as Warsaw summit in July 9 2016 has decided to station permanent troops in Poland and Baltic States. In Latvia 450 a battalion sized Canadian contingent will arrive, in Poland 1,000 US troops will be stationed. This actually means the NATO Article five on invading allied country will come fully into effect as in case of invasion in Baltic States or Poland the stationary troops will be first to be involved. This serves as clear warning to Russia that if it would wish to undertake the invasion there would be almost no chance to avoid a World War 3 situation.

However, the size of newly stationed troops in region will be still be minimal. Russia had begun its buildup of military forces already before 2013 and has modeled conflict with NATO in its massive drills before conflict in Ukraine. Russia has divided its military in four main military regions with most of its European part is called the Western military district. Russia has gathered already more that 20, 000  men and woman in Western Military district and 10, 000 men and woman in Southern Military district in Caucasus region. A special territory of importance is Kaliningrad region. Formerly German East Prussia it was divided between Poland and Soviet Union on 1945. Soviets established forward army in naval base in more far west region of USSR to support Soviets stationed in Poland and East Germany and gain entry for Soviet Baltic Navy to Atlantic. That changed after 1991 when Kaliningard region became sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland cutting direct land supply routes. After both countries joined NATO the Russian army and Navy considered themselves surrounded in 15,100 km² small area. So steps were taken to improve regions defense. Now Kaliningrad has become the most militarized region in Europe with 225,000 military personnel (2014 data) the main Baltic Naval base in Baltiysk. The region hosts about 60 different military units, has functional airfields, early warning radar station and radio listening stations. The 941,873 large regional population affected by militarization and constant propaganda emphasizing 1945 victory and military strength is considered one of the most loyal supporters of the Moscow policies. Kaliningrad is also a vulnerability and burden for Russia. Since it cannot supply it and deploy more forces by land it its forced to use the only route along the Baltic Sea from St. Petersburg to Kaliningrad. This is done by air and sea transport. Since the narrow route is between Baltic State and Swedish and sea and air space the task is made difficult because Russian Air Force and sea vessels always impose secrecy on their routes and never allows to track them by use of radars. Transponders are always off and ships do not respond to identification calls from NATO Air force and Navy. For this reason the NATO Air Policing mission always have to take off to scramble and identify Russian warplanes and NATO navy must detect ships and submarines that passes by. This equal harassment so far has always ended peacefully, however we must take note of Turkish experience when SU-24 that supposedly entered Turkish air space was shot down on October 29 2016. Russians themselves are sometimes risking to cause a serious incident by making low pass fly by over USS Donald Cook giving US warning signal that Baltic Sea belongs to them.

Another point of argument is Belarus. Belarus is one of the most loyal allied states to Russia, not to mention Armenia. It has force of 62,000 active men and woman, sizable tank and air force. Whats more to add to importance is that Belarus hosts Russian troops and probably will host more as answer to NATO buildup. While Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko officially seeks a partnership with EU countries he has stated many times that in case of Russian conflict with NATO Belarus will side with Russia and take direct part. That means Belarusian army is a threat to Latvian eastern region of Latgale and to Lithuania particularly to Lazdijai and Druskinkai municipalities along the Polish border that have Belarusian border on the east and Russian border on the east. Presumably both forces could attempt to take the region to cut off Baltic States from Poland and Western Europe. So far there has been insignificant opposition towards Russian military presence among Belarusian society. That could change if economic difficulties deepen for Belarus.

Two nearby Scandinavian countries Sweden and Finland with sizable military, but are not NATO members are concerned over worsening security issues in the region. There are many in both countries who advice to join NATO or at least expand the cooperation with NATO. Sweden that has maintained long history of neutrality and now it as the crossroads. Russia knows this and ha begun campaign of intimidation against Sweden to weaken their will to join NATO. Finland has very long border with Russia and historical policy of keeping neutrality with Russia, however that may change at some point and how Finland would react to the assault against ethnically close Estonia? So involvement of these two countries remains a question.

Russia’s reasons for invasion. For and against.

Baltic States provides almost no valuable natural resources for Russia to plunder. Financial gains might be the worth, however Russia already gains from Baltic States by trade, transit and gas supplies. Baltic States are trying to shake off reliance on Russian energy export, most successful in this matter is Lithuania. That’s way as same in Ukraine, Russia’s goal is to prevent Baltic States independence on energy sources and that can be done by multiple means.

One of the main reason for invasions are political and emotional. Baltic States was possession of  Russian Empire and was under Soviet occupation for most of XX century. Moscow highly regarded the European cultured territory and invested much in their industrialization and militarization. Now what is left is mostly empty carcasses of abandoned factories and war bases but what was left as inheritance was large numbers of Russian speaking immigrants in Latvia and Estonia. Both countries in early nighties did crucial and disputable actions to deny citizenship for most of these people creating a massive disappointment towards Latvian and Estonian ethnic population. The creation of large non-citizen community had political reason – Latvian national parties feared that Russian speaking voters could elect anti-western political force that would disrupt Latvian and Estonian path to NATO and US. In last 20 years the naturalization laws have allowed non citizens to obtain citizenship and indeed most of them vote for parties supporting Russia. While still significant size of non citizens remain and they are material for Russian special foreign policy to support Russian speakers outside Russia.

The policy to support Russian speakers by civil and military means was already introduced  during Boris Yeltsin and fully deployed by Vladimir Putin. Moscow spends millions of rubles to create so-called Russian World a net of organizations committed to protection of Russian language, education and culture outside Russia. In Latvia some of these organizations like Non Citizen congress, Russian party “Zarya”, Russian National Union and others are openly rebellious towards Latvian government and have been persecuted by law agencies. In Georgia 2008 and in Ukraine 2014 Russia claimed that Georgians and Ukrainians are creating violent actions against Russian speakers and was obliged to protect them. In Baltic States only violent outburst was Bronze Soldier riots in Tallinn on 2006 when Russia instigated massive cyber attacks and sent the provocateurs from Russian border. With financial capability and willing agents Russia could instigate a violent provocation to get casus belli for invasion. So far from 2014 various pro-Russian and anti-Russian demonstrations have taken place with small incidents not enough to cause outrage. Russian speaking community nevertheless is important recourse for Russia and worry for Riga and Tallinn. Tallinn has made many successful steps for Russian speaker integration, while Latvia has its ups and downs. The largest parliamentary fraction in Latvian Saeima the Harmony is kept in opposition and for its ties with Kremlin the major Latvian parties had vowed to keep it out of power. While Harmony is charge of Riga and Rēzekne municipality and is plagued with corruption scandals it has enough voter support base. On 2012 Russian national radicals managed to hold referendum for Russian as second state language and failed. Russian and Latvian languages both have been politicized by both sides and is used in political argument.The latest surveys show that Russian speakers feel most endangered by Latvians in areas where they live the most like Riga, Daugavpils and Latgale region while in Kurzeme (Courland) and Vidzeme with Latvian absolute majority they feel almost no danger and support Latvian policies. So Russia has many reasons both real and imaginary to use military action to protect Russian speakers in the region. However, as today it seems highly unlikely that Baltic States would impose any repressions towards its Russian speaking community.

The third reason is common Russian political strife against NATO. Vladimir Putin and his ruling elite started its carrier during last decades of the Soviet Union and deeply regrets its fall. Many of them blames directly US and West for the breakup and still suspects US of plotting against them. Some authors suggest that Putin at first wanted to create good relations with US and UK by trying to create good impression on Tony Blair and George W Bush, but, was deeply disappointed when  they made steps that  contradicted his own interests. Such was Eastern Europe’s admission to NATO and western support for democratic movements in Georgia, Ukraine and Russia itself. Putin’s inner circle has always blamed all the democratic revolutions in former Soviet countries as CIA plot and deeply feels that such plot could be carried out in Moscow. Russian propaganda has created the story of Fortress Russia that is encircled by NATO and China. So to contain this “threat” Russia has increased its military strength and severely limited political freedoms since 2012. One of the Russian strategies is to stage a preventive war to prevent NATO to attack or expand further to Russian borders. Currently preventive wars are being carried out in Ukraine to prevent in ascension to NATO and EU and in Syria to keep the Damascus pro-Russian regime and do not lose valuable Tartus Naval base. If Russia would feel further endangered by NATO increasing presence  in the Baltic States it may choose a “preventive strike” to remove NATO “threat” from its close borders. Question yet remains and cannot be answered – does Kremlin really do believe its being threatened by Western countries or it’s just propaganda phantom for Russian people made to justify Kremlin foreign and inner policy actions.

Fourth last reason for invasion is the use of war as tool for mass control. Russian society was deeply moved by annexation of Crimea  and had its support for war in Eastern Ukraine and intervention in Syria. War was and is central part of Russian propaganda since Soviet times and it is enough to hold massive support for the region despite economic difficulties. A war against NATO an event both feared and propagandized would be last and final straw for Kremlin to keep support of its people should there be danger of economical collapse. Also its a “leave nothing behind us” thinking by some of the Kremlin people who would rather perish in war then be arrested or hanged during revolution. That’s why Russian military doctrine does not fear using nuclear weapons.

The main reason for not invading the Baltic States is obvious: they are part of NATO. Russia may gamble that for sake of their own citizens and soldiers NATO countries might sacrifice the Baltic States, but as NATO has decided on permanent presence in the region the military conflict with all the member states will be impossible to avoid. Secondly such action will result complete international isolation of Russia that only contribute to its difficult economical and political state caused by War in Ukraine. Thirdly  the failure of this invasion may in light variant my cause breakdown of regime in worse case – nuclear war.

Scenarios for Invasion.

There are two possible scenarios for invasion. First: full-scale invasion. Second: limited, non-direct like it’s happening in Eastern Ukraine. Full scale invasion would require much use of land, sea and air force. The main Russian objectives would be securing control over the air and blockade the Baltic Sea. Kaliningrad region would be used to blockade the land route trough Suwalki, Poland to Vilnius and Riga. Russia would not necessarily need to assault Suwalki itself, but rather secure control over Lithuanian towns of Kybartai, Marijumpole, Kalvarija and Druskinskai. First cities to fall would be Narva, Tartu, Balvi, Kārsava, Rēzekne, Krāslava and Daugavpils. Since Vilnius is close to Belarusian border it would be first Baltic capital  to be attacked. The question of further advance will determined in the skies over Baltic, in the sea and the Suwalki gap zone. If Russia manages to secure access points to Baltic States it has chance to overrun the NATO forces trapped in encirclement. NATO forces in every way has technical  and numeric advantage over Russia and using it NATO would eventually break the blockade and force Russia to retreat. So NATO objective is to prevent the Baltic blockade and cut off Russia from Kaliningrad. Air, Naval and tactical superiority is in need.

A logical question then arises what about nuclear weapons? First no country has ever had experience of using nuclear weapon against country that also have them. However, the common sense and most military doctrines is to use nuclear weapons after the warring country has exceeded all conventional means. Their forces are defeated and are on rout and country is on breakdown. That is one of the actions Russia would possibly choose. However, Russia has far-fetched doctrine of using nuclear detonation to prevent NATO for acting further. A scenario in mind that Russia would use tactical nuke against military unit or city and then in fear of nuclear war would try to impose ceasefire advantageous for them. However, such strategy is a gamble. One country might possibly not respond and seek solution while other fires tactical nuke in response, creating response after response leading to ultimate nuclear annihilation.  So using or not using nuclear weapons it’s a question of common sense.

Second scenario is limited invasion like the one that takes place in Ukraine. Russia could try to form Russian peoples republics in Narva, Daugavpils and Rēzekne and try to instigate revolts in Riga, Tallinn and Vilnius. Same as in Ukraine Russia has large Russian speaking population to use for their goals, many of them including some Latvians would support pro-Russian revolt. Russia might still try to blockade Baltic sea and Suwalki gap, but it will refrain from taking all countries completely. Border areas would fall for Russian control and there Russia would try to create environment for frozen conflict that would bleed out three Baltic States and NATO trying to help them. Such scenario may avoid discussion of using nuclear weapons, however, Russia would have hard time to prove that there are no Russian troops in Latgale.

The Consequences

  In both case of full and limited invasion Russia would fall under tougher sanctions and isolation. Russian populace at first would support the invasion., however basing on military success or failures it would change drastically. Victory if such is possible would lead to Russia as totalitarian fortress in opposition against western block for times to come. Defeat would cause an unpredictable series of events, like state breakdown, civil war and foreign intervention. Limited frozen conflict in Baltic states will lead to same Russian totalitarianism and isolation only to hope find agreement over the conflict. Failure and loss of national prestige will leave its regime vulnerable.

For Baltic States its means great loses of lives, destruction of infrastructure and economical breakdown. In some ways the limited invasion and frozen conflict would be more crucial as it would be  a constant bleed out.

For the world it would mean the danger of WW3. Not to mention fear of use of nuclear weapon, the conflict might spread to Poland, Caucasus, Moldovo everywhere where NATO and Russian troops might encounter each other. This would be major political and economical disruption for EU countries and US and UK that are already plagued by social disturbances. By all means such conflict would be highly disadvantageous for both sides.

The Covert Soft Invasion Already Taking Place 

The Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu has stated that the supreme way to win the battle is to win it without fighting it. This is soft power, propaganda, espionage and subversion of state and society. In many accords this is already taking place for many years and has intensified. Russia clearly is aware of all the risks mentioned above. Thats why its obvious goal is to create climate in the West and Baltic States where its leaders and people are unwilling to fight a war. First its massive emission of Russian propaganda in all languages using all possible ways. Often this has success like Western Media still has issues who are the armed people in Donbass – separatists, terrorists, or Russian soldiers and mercenaries. There are people who are against sanctions and don’t see the need for supporting Ukraine and Baltic States. What Russia needs is for such people to be in large numbers and elect populist, nationalist or far left politicians who leads against so-called establishment and will contribute to lifting sanctions, recognize Crimean annexation and weaken NATO. Such politicians gained their successes recently in UK and managed to disrupt the EU and cause divide within British society. In France, Czech Republic, Austria, Greece ect. there are forces who wish to come to power and are supported by Russia. In US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump who has proved he almost no understanding about European and Russian policy wishes to achieve deal with Russia and question the need American involvement in  NATO.  Trump might be a gamble for Moscow to weaken the US by populist Russia sympathizing president. But, Trump is highly unpredictable person with zero experience in politics. If he keeps his America First! doctrine he would soon find that his deals with Russia are playing against him and will break them and cause problems for Russia. In similar way Napoleon and Hitler broke his deals with Russia after they found disadvantageous for them. In countries like Poland and Latvia where nationalistic conservative forces have taken power but are ideologically against Russia a another phenomena  is taking place while these forces are generally against Putin’s regime, they are very found of his conservatism and authoritarian methods. On both countries these forces are trying to sit on fence – while supporting military alliance against Russia they try to impose same laws that Putin would impose. Such situation is anomalous. The greatest fight for European hearts and minds are taking place now and will decide the events on battlefield if such takes place.

Conclusion

As it was discussed here war in Baltic States are not advantageous for both sides and will lead to plenty of worse consequences. So its fair to say that likelihood of such invasion is not possible. However, as long as Russia continues its war in Ukraine, does not end occupation of Crimea and continues intervention in Syria the danger of Russian military aggression stays.   As it was stated here Russia often does not need a logical or rational reason to start a war the decision can be based on fear, hate, power mongering and  oversight. Thus the war can be caused by simple unforeseen incident like in Sarajevo 1914 when few shots brought whole Europe to war that was waiting for it for last few years. So there is no reason to competently override the danger of Russian invasion. As long as aggressive, suspicious and totalitarian regime is in power in Moscow that relies heavily on its military success the danger will stay and should be considered and prepared for.

Comments Off on Russian Invasion in the Baltic States: Nightmare or Reality?

Filed under Current Events