Category Archives: Historical Articles

Great Myths of Latvian History

Kauja-small

As years, decades and centuries pass most important events like wars, regimes and cultural events are starting to lose their initial sharpness. In social memory these events are becoming either more dull, either romanticized or condemned and seen in black and white palette. There is no black and white in history, as events, past, present and future are created by various people regarding their interests that have various means and justifications for their actions. Events are also dictated by circumstances often beyond people’s control. Historical timeline is moved by perpetual rivalry within mankind, when various interests clash in personal, group, state or international scale.

In the process of interpreting these events no matter how old or new, people often create myths, falsehoods and outright lies. This can happen unintentionally as the knowledge about past events is often limited, this is especially relevant to prehistory and ancient ages, when there is lack of good archeological or written material. This also happens because over the decades, many events like wars or despotic regimes are becoming more romantic in people’s memory. Events like Crusades that was a harsh, controversial and bloody struggle, now is even a subject of comedy and the Crusader knights or their Muslim or Pagan foes are idolized. Similarly, many events are made darker than they were seen people at that time. For instance Russian history century long obsession with “Mongolian –Tatar yoke” and general idea about Dark Ages between 5th and 10th century.

Then again history is mythicized on purpose to gain important political goals in the past. “Who controls the past, controls the future, who controls the past, controls the present” a George Orwell quote from “1984” summarizes this need. Nationalist forces in 19th century on purpose idolized the ancient and medieval past, the Nazi and Communist regimes made great efforts to construct new historical understanding. It’s even present in democratic countries like British nostalgia for great imperial past and US American nostalgia for pre-1950s social order.

There words define historical myths. Nostalgia – for the past that was better than present and bringing it back would improve our present and future. Legendary – that makes events and historical personalities glorified. Condemnation – making events and people worse than they were, making these events and people as a warning from happening again. Also this reflects certain groups of people, like nations, religions and movements whose actions were made blacker then they were a warning from them in the present.

This article attempts to name and describe some of the myths in Latvian history, and seeks answers why they are wrong and what are the reasons for these myths.

Before 12th century ancient Latvians and Livonians had own countries, recognized by Christian countries and brutally uprooted by them.

It’s true that Catholic chronicles like the chronicle of Henry called some of the leaders of the early Latvian tribes kings – rex in Latin and some of their ruled territories –  kingdoms – regnum. Their micro states were set around their wooden fortresses. The civil societies were not as advanced as in other nearby lands like Lithuania and lands of Rus. Some historians compare the early Latvian statehood to Celtic society prior to Roman invasion. Also the Baltic tribes Latgalians, Curonians, Semigallians and Selonians had no common perception that they lived in Latvia and must unite to create such country. In Lithuania the unification of Lithuanian and Belarusian tribes was forceful event by strong warlord Mindaugas. In ancient Latvia there was no such leader. However, even if these rulers were called as Rex in Catholic chronicles does not mean they were fully acknowledged and regarded as sovereign rulers. They simply were not Christian. They had no recognition by Rome and even their conversion to Christianity placed them in vassal status rather than senior. The reason why Lithuanian Grand Duke Mindaugas was recognized was because he converted to Christianity and was strong enough to be accepted as senior. While in case of ruler of Jersika Visvaldis who was Orthodox his conversion was not respected by Catholic crusaders and he lost ownership of his land. So as pagan rulers the Latvian tribal warlords were certainly seen as second-hand rulers to Catholic crusaders, Holy Roman Empire and the Papal State. Their conversion was not enough as they could not be strong enough to hold their senior status. While there was early form of states in Latvian territory it was more a tribal microstate not recognized by Christian countries as weak Pagan states with no hope to gain recognition as senior kingdoms.

Latvian Pagan religion was brutally destroyed by Christian invaders and conversion was forceful

Archeological and written sources gives very light details about religion in Latvia prior to 12th century. There are examples of burial traditions, some items that were used in religion. Often the early Latvians used Christian regalia traded from Christian countries for their own needs. The chronicles give very light details about Latvian pagan beliefs. Apart from Baltic Prussians there is no evidence of ancient Latvian priesthood. The Latvian Mythology as it is known is based on writings, beliefs and folksongs from 15th to 19th century as gathered by folk song studies and observations. That means the pagan religion if such was, rather a tradition was kept for centuries and experienced transformation. And not always the conversion was enforced. In 11th-12th when Latvian territory was visited by traders from West and East many of the local rulers and their families converted to Christianity for benefits that came with it. While their subjects mostly did not or embraced Christian faith rather passively. That just shows how important were the traditional views as they could be easily replaced by another religion for material benefits. Also for many centuries most of Latvian ancestors has very light understanding of Christianity as all rites and writings were in Latin. The Reformation and Enlightenment in 15th -18th century started teaching Christian beliefs in Latvian and Bible and other Christian works were translated into Latvian. Also in many cases the true cause of resistance to Christian conversion or moving back to Pagan beliefs was because becoming Christian meant becoming vassal to Crusaders.

Some authors argue that initially the mostly Germanic traders and Bishop Meinard had no initial intention to baptize Livs and Baltic tribes by force. In 1170 from Segeberg Bishop Meinard first came to Liv land around Daugava and started peaceful mission. He also asked permission to Duke of Polotsk (knyaz) Vladimir who imposed Livs to pay tributes to him, to build small church in Ikšķile. In 1184 such was build and small congregation of freely converted Livs were made. However, Meinards was attacked by Lithuanian and Semigallian riders so he asked permission to Liv leaders to build stone castle in Ikšķile in exchange for baptism. It was done and one part of the Castle belonged to Meinards others to Livs. Livs soon broke the agreement and dropped Christianity and attacked Meinards. Meinards tried to leave Ikšķile, but received warnings of Liv attempt to kill him and remained in castle where he died. Then a monk Theoderich came to Ikšķile and assessed that small Christian congregation is in danger and called for military support igniting the Baltic crusades. The Crusades led by more ruthless Bishops as Berthold and Albert were violent, as Crusaders used force to baptize tribal Balts and Livs if there was no other option. Soon it turned out that the war was not about faith but about the land. Becoming Christian meant becoming Crusader vassal and subject and many resisted resulting permanent loss of land. While it did not mean that Crusaders managed to completely uproot ancient Baltic beliefs, they stayed within peasantry and Crusader seniors did very small effort to counter them. More efforts were done by Lutherans in 15th -18th century. First by educating Christianity in Latvian and second by exporting witch trials that were mostly carried out in Lutheran Swedish Vidzeme. Also Herrnhuter Brüdergemeine movement managed to fully convert Latvian peasants. In 19th century Pagan beliefs were weakened by Christian education. A revival was made by Latvian nationalists who as their commoners in Germany and elsewhere looked for symbols in the ancient times creating a legend of old peaceful Latvian pagan religion destroyed by while Crusaders. In reality the situation was far from simple and the religion, tradition, education and land ownership each played its part.

Battle of Saule was joint victory by the Baltic tribes over German invaders

Voldemārs Vimba created an epic painting to please nationalistic authoritarian ruler Kārlis Ulmanis. In the painting soldiers carrying Latvian and Lithuanian flags charge Crusaders in the Battle of Saule in 1236. While first mentions of flag similar to Latvian national state flag dates to 1279 when Latgalian soldiers came to assist Crusaders who were attacked by Semigallians, the Lithuanian flag as well as Latvian flag itself certainly could not be used in the Battle against Crusaders. Because Latgalians and Estonians fought together with Crusaders against Lithuanians and Semigallians. There was no Baltic unity in the battle, as such unity was not possible. Lithuanians regularly raided Latvian territory and even Estonia. Each tribal leader had their own interests and Semigallians were not always allied with Lithuanians. Lithuanians viewed Latgalians and Estonians allied with Crusaders as enemies and had no intention on liberating them from Crusaders. And the battle was mainly Lithuanian victory as it halted Crusader advance in Lithuania while it not do much for Latvian territory. However, nationalistic minded people has made September 22 as Baltic Unity Day. A day that is required, but September 22 is not Unity Day. Its Victory Day for Lithuania only.

Latvia is native Russian land. Before the arrival of Crusaders many ancient Latvian micro states were vassals of the Russian duchies and converted to Orthodox

It’s true that Russian and Belarusian duchies held influence on Latgalian, Liv and Selonian tribes. In return for protection and trade rights they made them pay tributes and some ruler families like Visvaldis of Jersika converted to Orthodox. Russian traders lived in Koknese and visited other small castles and Crusader Riga. Crusaders often had to deal with Duchy of Polotsk and Pskov because they recognized them as seniors over these tribal leaders. But, it seems hardly that these duchies recognized these micro states as their land. Other than tribute paying and building the church and sometimes hosting a war party, there was no limitations to their sovereignty. Latgalians, Livs and Selonians were simply a client that paid tributes and traded with them. A very limited effort were made to reclaim them from Crusaders and Duchies only cared for their own safety from Crusaders. As yet of 12th centuries the Duchies of formal Kyivean Rus had no Russian or Belarusian identity rather than Orthodox people of Rus. Also amount of people from present Russia and Belarus were very small to call Latvia a native Russian land. The duchies of Rus were in complicated situation as they were invaded by Mongol hordes and were vassals to Golden Horde themselves. There was no interest in conquering the Baltic lands. This interest showed up during the reign of Ivan IV The Terrible who first aspired to seize control over Catholic Livonia.

The Swedish rule in Vidzeme between 1629 to 1700 was generally better for Latvian peasant population

During the Crusader order rule in Vidzeme the Baltic Germans gradually seized all top positions in politics and economy and became the major land owners. Latvians had only few full titled senior land owners in Courland, most were subjects to lands belonging to Livonian Order and the Church. Gradually in 14th -16th century the changes in economic order and advances in agriculture forced the land owners to empower their rights over their peasant subjects and limit their rights of movement and land ownership. Land owners needed full control of the agricultural workforce and that created serfdom that sometimes were exceptionally harsh. This serfdom remained after fall of Livonian Confederation and became harsher under Polish rule. In the result of war between Poland and Sweden in 1621 the Northern Latvia and Riga was annexed by Sweden. What Sweden did in contrast to Duchy of Courland and Polish Latgale was the reduction of agricultural lands. 40 percent of land was given to Swedish nobles limiting the monopoly for Germans. About five-sixths of estates in Vidzeme were reclaimed by Swedish crown. This was done to increase the revenues for Sweden and it succeeded because tax incomes grow substantially. While Swedes tried to improve the life of peasants of building schools, allowed to translate Bible in Latvian, they did not fully abolish serfdom as in 1681 it was rejected by Livonian Knighthood that represented German interests. Swedes also imposed heavier tax and corvee burden and created harsh physical punishments for failing to pay them. Swedish Lutherans also increased witch hunts in Vidzeme. In the end the Sweden managed Vidzeme for their own interests that weakened German nobility, but kept the relations in balance. The serfdom was only abolished in Latvia by Russian Empire in 1817 and 1819 after very long and complicated negotiations with Livonian Knighthood while in Latgale it was only abolished in 1861 with rest of Russia as it was not considered part of Baltic provinces.

The Duchy of Courland is first form of Latvian statehood. 

The Duchy of Courland and Semigallia was outcome of collapse of Livonian Confederation and its subjection to Poland-Lithuania. The leadership of Livonian Order sought agreement with Poland and the last master of the Livonian Order Gotthard Kettler became Duke of Courland and Semigallia. It was a vassal state of Poland-Lithuania led by Baltic German nobility where Latvians had their secondary roles with no say in politics. In their rule the Duchy was quite independent and also could create their own fleet and colonize lands in Caribbean sea and Africa. While all these colonies were hopelessly lost some romantic inclined people want to claim them as Latvian property. The ownership of Tobago and Gambia may improve Latvian standings in Olympic Field Athletics and Football, but that is more a joke. The Germanic dukes of Courland while sending Latvians to their colonies never saw their Duchy as Latvian state, it was impossible in 15th-18th century. For them the Duchy was sovereign part of former Livonia associated with Polish throne. Even Poland cannot claim these colonies as Polish government did not care about Couronian efforts and did not gave any support and hardly noticed that Duchy had lost them.

The period between 1200 to 1918 was 700 years of slavery, afterwards Latvians won full political and economic freedom

In 1920 when Latvia become independent many noticed very grim appearance in economic and social statistics – while ethnic Latvians held 80% in agriculture, they were minority in finance and industry where major players were Germans, Jews and Poles. Obvious answer was to blame the 700 years of slavery. A time when foreign powers enslaved Latvians, took away their land and abused them in economy and politics. While in 12th -16th century the various peasants and small traders and craftsmen did not identity them as Latvians as whole and saw their subjection as unfortunate social reality that in many cases was not so grim as they still had lot of freedom in income gathering and movement, later in 19th century in result of nationalism a ethnocentric thinking emerged placing Latvians against other nations as victims. This victimhood was even boosted by some radical German thinkers as Garlieb Merkel who in 1796 wrote his epic work “Latvians” where he protested serfdom and accused Germans of gravely abusing poor dark Latvian peasants. As controversial book was it contributed to the abolishment of serfdom and greater German efforts to educate Latvian peasants.

While Latvians were never only a peasant nation. There was small Latvian nobility in Courland, there were Latvian traders, craftsmen and house owners. Latvian only congregations appeared only in 16th century in the result of reformation. Latvian traders had their own guilds and trader unions.

The hash times for Latvian peasants in 16th -18th centuries were favorite subject for nationalistic and Marxist authors while despite of all Latvian peasants had their own schools, churches and some peasants could also gain relative wealth. It’s because Germans cared that Latvians receive education and live in relative wellbeing so they can work better and live according to their standards of modernity. Before abolishment of serfdoms Germans viewed Latvians as their lower-class neighbors, workers and occasional rivals in commerce. In 19th century as Latvian nationalism and social democracy emerged Germans now felt threatened by the Latvians both politically and economically. And it was not because they suddenly became stronger after serfdom was abolished – it’s because they were rivals to Germans all the time and gradually became stronger as their economic and political situation improved.

The confrontation between Latvians, Germans and other nationalities were required for nationalists and Marxists for their own goals. For that the myth of 700 years slavery was essential. In 1905 when in many places Latvian peasants attacked German mansions the revenge for serfdom was called the main reason for these atrocities. That also boosted German hate towards Latvians and this mutual confrontation expressed itself in War for Independence in 1918-1920 while also some German units served for Latvian cause. Latvian fear of German knighthood continued in political battles with Baltic Germans in 1920-1939. Finally, in 1939 Nazi Germany called for repartition of Baltic Germans to Germany and it was greeted by nationalistic Latvians. Later the Soviet Latvia historiography continued to exploit the 700 years of slavery by showing serfdom as feudal atrocity in contrast to progressive communist society.

The idea of independent Latvian state was born even before 1905 and strengthened in the ranks of the Latvian Rifleman during First World War

The idea that four historical regions Courland (Kurzeme), Semigallia (Zemgale), Vidzeme and Latgale forms united land called Latvia formed in late 19th century. Before for most the land was known as Livonia that Estonia was part of. For Latgalians it was also not so clear as Latgale was part of Vitebsk province and only in 1917 they fully determined themselves to Latvia. Generally the first Latvian nationalists the New Latvian movement fought for Latvian education and culture, equal rights and some local political say within unified Russian Empire. Such demand was high enough for those times as independent small nation in the age of empires was unthinkable. Latvians first needed to improve education, fight against Russification and reluctant German nobility. Russian Empire as senior ruler was only as bad that it first secured the rights of Germans and later tried to impose Russian language. But, independent country was only some could dream off. The early 20th century was filled with Marxist ideas and the New Current movement demanded major reforms for workers and peasants and were one of the first who made claims for Latvian autonomy within reformed Russia. In 1905 the social democrats were the main fighters for autonomy together with anarchists while most nationalists actually demanded to keep current order or at least make Russia constitutional as promised by Tsar Nicholas II in his October manifesto. As revolution was crushed, many came to conclusion that only way for autonomous Latvia is the collapse of Tsar family rule.  The people creating first plans for autonomy were social democrats like Miķelis Valters, Linards Laicēns, ect.

1915 was crucial time as Imperial Germany invaded Latvia and took over Courland and Semigallia and were close to capture Riga. This was a time of nationalistic fervor to call for Latvian Regiment within Russian army to chase Germans away from Latvian lands. Now also nationalists started to call for national autonomy and hoped that Latvian rifleman will serve as example to the Russian throne. Among Latvian rifleman there was nationalistic enthusiasm, but it was as mainly aimed to defeat Germany and rest will follow. After the crushing defeat in 1916 many of them drifted towards Bolshevism as it called Tsar responsible for the great losses and no friend of Latvians and called for peace. In 1917 after the fall of Riga the most of them moved to Russia and fought for Soviet cause.

What happened in Latvia in 1917-1918 was confusion. In February 1917 Tsar was deposed and Russia became democratic republic. If so then Latvia can now ask for national autonomy, however Russian Provisional government never approved this. Future president Jānis Čakste claimed that while he and his commoners were against Tsar they were never against Russia and never wanted to secede and do not want their own parliament, but want to live in common western influenced democratic Russia.  While others like Latvian National Democrat Party called for fully established autonomous  state within democratic Russian federal republic. Social Democrats also called for autonomous Latvia within unified social democratic state of Russia. In 12 August (July 30) Vidzeme Peoples Land Council called for unified autonomous democratic Latvia.

All these calls for autonomy suddenly became obstructed when German army captured Riga on September 3 1917 and gradually took over all Vidzeme and Latgale. Russia had promised nothing and Germany was more willing to create Livonian Duchy. Then Bolsheviks took power in Petrograd. The Latvian right-wing bourgeoise politicians and social democrats had very few options now. In December 2 1917 Latvian National Provisional Council made declaration calling for creation of national autonomous state its important that this declaration no more talked about being together with Russia but Latvia as autonomous state not saying from whom. As such it was pre-declaration of independence. In November 11 1918 Germany had capitulated. Bolsheviks gathered forces to invade Baltic States. There was no more variants for autonomy – Estonia and Lithuania already had declared independence in February 1918. The right wing parties and social democrats gathered in November 18 1918 to declare independence.

Independence was won by solely Latvian efforts/Latvia gained independence only because of foreign countries

When in 1930 Latvia demonstrated historical epic Lāčplēsis on movie screens the Estonians complained that despite showing Estonian army at one episode the movie grossly downplayed Estonian assistance for Latvians. While this movie showed the support from British and French navy. Then in 2008 movie the Guards of Riga completely omitted both Estonians and Allies from the war effort.

Estonian army pushed away the Bolsheviks from their land and marched in Northern Latvia. There at Cēsis in June 22 1919 they together with Latvian forces defeated the renegade German Iron Division and Landeswehr that staged uprising against Latvian Provisional Government. Months before that these same units together with Latvians made advance against Bolsheviks and took back Riga. The Allied navy was stationed in Liepāja and contributed fighting Bolsheviks and later opened fire against rouge Bermondt forces. Then Lithuanian and Polish army helped in Latgale front. Latvia was never alone in the war and without allied forces it would have significantly harder time to gain independence.

Then again was it only because of allied support? The answer is that independence was gained in the chain of events and circumstances. Allied navy was sent to Baltic sea not to support Baltic independence but to stop the Bolshevik advance. Allied countries mainly wanted unified Russia free of Bolsheviks, the new Baltic States and Baltic German factions from there was only temporary allies and the question of Baltic independence should had been settled out with Russia.  Baltic States were only legally recognized in 1921 when it was clear that these countries will actually exist and not be thrown into oblivion like Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia. Estonian forces came deep in Northern Latvia and fought against Germans, because first they needed to completely destroy the Bolshevik threat and defeat hostile German forces. Polish leaders wanted restored Poland as big as possible to the extent of 1776 borders. But, Poland needed to completely defeat Bolsheviks so they agreed to take part in liberation of Latgale. So all parties involved had one major interest – defeat Bolsheviks. Latvia until 1920 was question mark – what if Bolsheviks would be defeated by White forces – would they approve such republic? The German forces in Latvia are quite strong – can weak Latvian army defeat them? But, Bolsheviks is a menace so as long this Latvia fights against it we help them – let’s see how long they will last. So in the end it was also up to Latvians themselves to prove their worth in combined battles in Cēsis, Rīga and Latgale. And with Latvians we must not forget Germans, Russians, Jews, Belarusians, Poles and other national minorities fighting in Latvian army.

The Kārlis Ulmanis regime was fascist

In 1960 Latvian soviet historian Aleksandrs Drīzulis published book called “Latvia under the helm of fascism” at first it may look as a book about Nazi occupation. When you began to read it’s actually about the authoritarian Kārlis Ulmanis regime. Kārlis Ulmanis regime was radical in the way that is fully self-centered. All parties including his own Latvian Green Farmers Union was banned. There was no parliament, constitution was stopped. All was in hands of Prime Minister then President Kārlis Ulmanis. There was no party made after the coup, there was no new constitution it was just Kārlis Ulmanis and his government and his bureaucracy. Along with that loyal army, police and National Guard. Was that enough to be called fascist? There were concentration camps for short time in 1934-1935 but the arrested were eventually released. Secret police fought political opponents among the real Latvian fascists and  Baltic German Nazis, but scale or repression was never severe. Press was censured, while one of the themes banned in media was anti-Semitism. While left-wing Jewish movements were banned the  Zionist movements were untouched. Ulmanis government severed rights of national school autonomy but most of national autonomy schools were kept.  While the economy became more controlled by the state the private sector was never fully abolished. In these terms Latvia resembled more an absolute monarchy.

Then there are plans and tendencies that shows Ulmanis Latvia could become fascist. In late 1930’s Ulmanis started planning of creating national party under his name. He also emulated some of the actions of Benito Mussolini like creating chamber (camera) system to control various sectors of economy and similar to Mussolini he made severe changes in Old Riga by destroying city street quarters to create new square around Dome Cathedral. Mussolini did the same when he destroyed whole city district in Rome to create a new grand entry street into Vatican City. Plus Ulmanis also planned to create new massive monumental buildings like Victory Arch similar to Adolf Hitler vision for Berlin. In the end in 1939 -1940 when economy was in shatters and unemployment was growing Ulmanis made steps to create labor duty that would engage large number of people in forced labor camps. His law specially targeted Jews who were less involved in agricultural labor and wanted to force them to work in the field. Ulmanis Latvia had potential to becoming fascist if it would last for another twenty years.

Before the Russian rule Latvia was undeveloped rural economy, most Latvians lived in farms. Russians brought industry and culture

This claim is sometimes seen in some of the Russian forums and comments. The Russian nationalists claim that Latvians before 1940 where low cultured poor people who lived in farmsteads (hutor) with almost no industry in the cities. This is one of the most absurd myths as Latvia had already well-developed mercantile industry in 17th-18th century and yes the industry gradually grew under the Russian empire which by the logic would grow under Sweden, Poland or any other country. Latvian industry suffered a massive blow when in 1914-1915 large portions of factory equipment even whole workers were evacuated to inner Russia. But in first ten years during independent Latvia the industry gradually recovered and it was not just owned by Germans, Russians and Jews – there was lot of successful Latvian owners. One of the most successful Latvian industrial company VEF made a variety of products from nails to airplanes. What is reality that many of the most successful Soviet Latvian enterprises was nationalized and kept by the Soviets in 1940. And about the hutor – the Latvian agriculture while facing issues in workforce fared no worse than later Soviet collective farms that were imposed on people and those who resisted were deported to Siberia.

Before 1940 all Jews in Latvia called themselves žīdi (yids) and not ebreji (Hebrews) and there was no problem with that. Ebrejs is word imposed by Soviets

There are three common names for Jews in Latvian. Biblical Jews are called jūds. Then there are two words. One is ebrejs that is close to word Hebrew and Russian word evrei. And then there is word žīds. Žīds was the most common way the Latvians called Jews, in Poland and Lithuania a similar word is Żydzi and Žydai. However, this word resembles word Yid that is considered offensive. It’s even more offensive in Russia where it’s also means cheapskate and niggard. During the times of pogroms  a popular slogan was “Spasai Rossiju! Bei židov!” (Save Russia! Beat the Yid!) n 1940 the Soviets banned the word žīds and made ebrejs as only word to describe Jew.  What happened a year later was a Pandora’s box. Invading Nazis on quest to exterminate all Jews used the ban of žīds in their propaganda to prove Soviet occupation main power was Jews. As this word was controversial as it was it now got a very dark tone in the light of the Holocaust. After the return of the Soviets the žīds dropped out of common vocabulary and ebrejs was and is common word in Latvian for Jews. While exiles in west still used žīds and for nationalists in underground it was the true word. Then independent Latvia these people came out and asked to restore the Latvian žīds and drop the soviet ebrejs as it was never used before Soviet occupation and Jews themselves did not used to call themselves. While others started to theorize that there is difference between žīds and ebrejs.

What was in reality that word ebrejs was quite common word among Jews themselves before the war. In most official documents written by Jews themselves the word ebrejs is used. While there was no protests against the žīds word, it seems that Jews really preferred neutral word ebrejs because žīds reminded them of Tsarist time anti-Semitic oppression.

Jews were mainly responsible for Soviet repressions of 1940-1941

There are comments in Latvian main internet news sites. And when a news item regarding Jewish issue is published there is nice bet that at least one of them will mention the word
Šustins. Semyon Shustin was Jewish national from Moscow who worked in NKVD was a ruthless soviet officer who took part mass deportations of June 14 1940. He was never from Latvia and during the repressions hundreds of Jews from Latvia were deported to Siberia. Soviet government closed all Jewish organizations and arrested most social and political activists.

In June 22 19141 Nazi Germany invaded and massive anti-Semitic campaign started. Nazi German propagandists many of them willingly Latvian activists like Ādolfs Šilde made countless accusations of Jews as main perpetrators of the soviet occupation. Year later when killing of the Latvian Jews was mostly finished to justify a propaganda book and movie was made to fully summarize Jewish guilt the occupation. The book the Horrible Year was so successful that still this day many including parliamentary speaker describes the 1940 as Baigais Gads  a name for book mainly about imagined Jewish atrocities in 1940.

In reality while many Jews saw Stalin as lesser evil compared to Hitler, if we start a detailed outlook on Jewish participation in Soviet occupation it shows that Jewish presence especially local was limited and marginal. Important people like Semyon Shustin was from Moscow. Majority of the party members, members of various municipalities and soviet organizations were Latvians. Jews were also prevented from reaching high ranks. Jews were involved in repressive structures, but not  in high percentage and are responsible as Latvians who took part in them. While these words may seem pointless for some people for whom seeing two or five Jewish surnames in the list means approval for their world of conspiracy.

During the WW2 large masses of Latvians actively took part in Holocaust without German orders in revenge for Soviet occupation

This claim was first created by Nazi propaganda who wished to portray mass killings as purely local initiative as revenge for Jewish Bolshevik atrocities. After the war some Jewish survivors continued this theme and published dramatic books fully accusing Latvians who killed Jews without German orders or took part in the shootings willingly. Soviets picked this up and published books directed towards Latvian exiles where they accused them of taking part in Nazi atrocities. Russian propaganda continues this narrative.

So far academic research has failed to prove that in time of so-called interregnum – the period between exchange from Soviet to Nazi power a Jewish killings have taken place. This interregnum happened because Soviets were quick to retreat and in many places Latvian national partisans took power. They regarded Germans as their allies and gradually returned authority to Germans. However, most cases show these partisans were involved in attacking retreating soviets while there were events attacking Jewish refugees from Lithuania, however most of these attacks took place after Germans had taken power and ordered Latvians to attack the refugees.

Holocaust in Latvia has been documented very well and shows that killings took place after the Germans had full installed power and taken control over Latvian national partisans or Self Defense groups. These groups and two main Security Police commandos Arājs and Valgulāns group did the most job of killing Jews while all these murders were directed and observed by Germans. As for the tragic events in July 4 1941 when Arājs men burned down the main synagogue that German propaganda portrayed as major pogrom; the official Nazi documents states that local participation was insignificant and unsatisfactory.

However, no light words are said for Latvian propagandists from Pērkonkrusts (Thundercross) movement who voluntary published hundreds of anti-Semitic articles in the press and before the war some of their publications state that they favored the removal of the Jews from Latvia. After the movement demanded Germans to create Latvian national forces, they were all arrested and sent to concentration camps.

Nazi occupation was far better than the Soviet occupation

The massive deportations of June 14 1940 and many other repressions were grave image of the soviet occupation. During the Nazi occupation the national flag of Latvia was flown only for few days and was banned as well as the national anthem and other symbols. In 1941-1942 there was no German intention for restoration of independent Latvia. Instead plan was drawn to colonize Latvia and integrate into Nazi Germany. Rhetoric changed after Stalingrad and Germans needed Latvian support for continuing war effort. Latvian Waffen SS Legion was formed and promises were made of Latvian national government. Never fulfilled.

As off repressions – Nazis killed 9000 Jews in Latvia and also sent Jews from Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Nazis killed about 2000 Roma’s. Nazis killed people supporting soviet partisans. Nazis deported whole families from Belarus to Latvia, where many children died from sickness and starvation. Nazis repressed and killed people calling for independent Latvia. There is no need to compare.

Salaspils camp was a death camp

Germans had diverse classification list for their camps. For instance the Kaiservald (Mežaparks) was called a concentration camp while Salaspils was called simply a camp. They also had camps called extermination camps and death camps. Salaspils was simply called camp. It’s this just a guise? During the soviet occupation in sixties some people were inspired by the new memorials in Auschwitz and Dachau so they wanted similar in Latvia. Salaspils was chosen for a new memorial and thousands of people who died there deserved this. However, soviets published books where they called Salaspils a Death camp. Soviets made claims that there was gas machines in the camp. Another claim that camp served as blood repository, that children from Russia and Belarus were used to collect blood for German soldiers.

There are no proof that there was ever a gas machine used in Salaspils.  There was no logical reason for mass blood collecting without determining the blood type that would make blood transfer out of question. On 1943 because of issues the German medical authority canceled the use of blood doses in the Eastern Front instead preferring direct transfer. Also the blood transport to Western front from Latvia would be costly and unreliable process.  Blood collecting took place, but not in large-scale and mostly for medical reasons as doctors tried to limit the spread of diseases that would endanger not only children but also adult workers. The camp was for most as punishment camp for people of various sorts also soviet prisoners of war, anti-nazi resistance and unemployed. People died there because of harsh work conditions, sickness and starvation. It was a horrible place, but soviet claims and their given death toll is gravely exaggerated.

Latvian Waffen SS is responsible for war crimes

Latvian Waffen SS was formed in 1943 after most of Jewish killing took place. Its two divisions 15th and 19th division and smaller adjacent units  took part in combat from Leningrad to Berlin. The Police Battalions, Security Police commandos are not Latvian Waffen SS Legion. Some of the former members of the criminal units later were enlisted into Latvian Waffen SS legion. That is their individual responsibility. Similarly every Soviet soldier who made war crimes or allied soldier holds individual responsibility.

Latvian Waffen SS truly fought for independent national Latvia. The Latvians within Soviet army or Latvian soviet partisans were either just conscripts or trained saboteurs

Latvian Waffen SS carried out German orders. It fought hard battles and many times stopped great soviet offensives and allowed German units to escape onslaught. They never really had time and chance to fight for independent Latvia no matter how each of them wanted it. Only thing they achieved is that they helped many refuges to escape Latvia by halting and stopping advancing soviets.

Most of the Latvian Waffen SS Legion were conscripts. War was seen to each of his own eyes. So as the soldiers in the Latvian Rifleman divisions in the Red Army. Many of its members truly wanted to liberate Latvia from the Nazis. The Latvian Jews in the Latvian Rifleman division had a clear motivation. While there was practice of trained Soviet partisan drops in Latvia, some of them also did war crimes their motivation was either sense of duty or motivation to fight Nazi’s. Both of these sides had plenty of wrong; Latvians had to take part in both sides. There was no Latvian side in the Eastern front.

Latvian national partisans were bandits created by German secret service and then submitted to the allied secret services

One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. After the end of world war hundreds of people did not accept the soviet occupation and went into woods. There was hope for allied war with soviets and these people hoped their guerilla will be short. Instead it resorted to hopeless battle until 1956. Soviets called them bandits and accused of atrocities, murders and looting. In some events it was true as partisans were vicious towards local soviets and attacked shops to get supplies. One could say that it was false to wait for allied war with Soviets, however the allied rhetoric made such hopes. In reality the US and UK leadership was always afraid of Soviet attack and feared to attack first. Soviets also made claim that these partisans were created by Nazis to work behind enemy lines. It’s true that Nazis really created such battalions like SS-Jagdverband-Ost that however was almost completely destroyed by the end of the war. Prior to Nazi invasion in 1941 Nazis made contacts with many members of Latvian anti-Soviet resistance and exiles and also direct Nazi supporters and then trained for operations. However, its doubtful that Nazis managed to train large partisan force as large it was during 1945-1956.

Allied secret services CIA and SIS both made efforts to assist the Latvian partisans. These efforts were soon uncovered by Soviets and used against the allies. People were lured in Latvia and captured. Soviets even created fake partisan units to lure allied agents mostly Latvians into the trap. Since the start the allied secret service operation in Latvia was controlled by Soviets. Did partisans regarded CIA and SIS as their superiors? In their desperate war against soviets they needed every help they can get, but since allied efforts were hindered by the KGB there was no significant way to help them.

Russification during Tsarist times were harsher then in Soviet times

Sometimes in mostly Ukrainian twitter shares an old exhibition piece – a pillory sign – “he spoke Latvian” as punishments in school for speaking Latvian during Tsarist times. In the late 19th century such pillory signs and really did exist and Ukrainians use this to their argument against Russian influence. While Russian would probably say that this shows that Russification in Tsar times was more harsh than in Soviet times when it was always nonexistent. During the harshest period of Russification the Latvians had answer – private Latvian schools that became popular. People tried to avoid official state schools where Russian language was imposed. Russification gradually weakened after 1905. During the soviet occupation, Latvian language was taught in schools, Latvian language was on TV and Radio and there was no fines for its usage outside official use. Officially all documents were in Russian, it was official language in army and police. But, was the most crucial – soviets did not forced thousands of immigrants from Soviet Union to learn Latvian. It seemed useless for them and that made heavy shoulder on Latvian language. It was regarded as a language only for Latvians, it was not needed for Russian speakers and Russian speakers did not speak with Latvians in their language. Of course not all of the new soviet residents were ignorant of the Latvian language, but that was long gradual diminishing of the Latvian language rather than brash suppression that only creates resistance.

During the soviet rule, the Soviet government invested millions in Latvian economy and received very less in return therefore its Latvia that owns debt to Russia

When Latvia speaks about large amount of losses created by Soviets and asks for large refund, Russia always reminds of their massive investment into Latvia. Until now such claim was let to pass however now studies conclude that from 1946 to 1991 Soviet Union spent 24,684 million rubles in Latvia while gained 40,645 revenue from Latvia. 15,961 million were spent less than gained. The money gained from Latvia was used for poor areas in Russia and support other soviet republics. Latvia had valuable agricultural and industrial products and was very valuable and profitable captive nation for Moscow. For this reason there is regret for loss of Latvia and plans always in place of how to return it.

During the Soviet times large part of Latvian intellectuals and cultural workers were involved with KGB

Soviet secret service KGB was the most powerful and biggest spy agency in world history. It both held responsibility of foreign and interior intelligence. And as of interior intelligence it was not just counter intelligence it was complete control of the society in every its aspect to counter anti-Soviet activity. That involved recruitment of people from cultural, academic and artistic circles. There are people who are known and who have confessed, then they rumors. The issue is that even partial list of agents is still classified. The KGB documents research commission has made demands to publish the database, however Latvian Constitutional Defense Bureau   is still against it. This claim will stay unverified as long as the lists of agents that is available in  Latvia remains classified. And people will say that there is a reason why it’s still classified.

Soviet times were generally worse than now

The most harshest years of the Soviet occupation was 1945-1953 during last years of Stalin. These years were characterized with another mass deportation in 1949, enforced collectivization, war with partisans and painful economic recovery. Level of living improved in sixties and level of repressions dropped. In sixties and seventies the soviet technical advancement was lacking in comparison of Western level of technology. However, in most part soviet production was still able provide people with good level of living and welfare. The cultural level despite censorship was reasonably high, advancements were made in arts, literature, cinema and music. Censorship even made artists, writers and musicians to be more creative to express themselves so hidden messages were shown. As of all even despite Nikita Khrushchev vulgar attack on modern arts (he later regretted and said he was just confused) and stagnate conservatism of Leonid Brezhnev the culture in Soviet Union was prosperous although it could not completely avoid the banality of the soviet propaganda. In similar way the education while plagued with obligatory soviet ideology managed to provide good level of knowledge.  Medicine was state funded, while it was often slow and not as technically advanced as in west it served its purpose. Also Soviet Union was not fully closed from the west and many of the western culture and education reached Latvia and influenced the people.

The most negative aspects of the post Stalin years was mass immigration, increased pollution created by industry and the military. Still fear from army and KGB was all the time present, the Latvian men were sent to Afghanistan and later Chornobyl. Latvians could not freely travel the world, the contacts with west was limited. In 80s the Soviet economy went into decline resulting deficit of products, increased corruption and technologic backwardness. It seems that if Soviet Union did not collapse in 1991 and never took any reforms it would go into deep recession and would not be able even to challenge the West. If Soviet Union would try to make approach similar to China, by keeping the state order but introduce free market things may turned out differently, but Soviet elite seemed to completely mismanage their reforms and the empire collapsed from the actions of their own rulers.

Comparing to our days while technology is way advanced, almost none of is made in Latvia. The state and private sector cannot provide jobs to all people in Latvia resulting emigration. Culture is almost free from any sign of censorship, but the main issue is state funding that is always lacking and privately funded culture is of many things. Same as education and medicine almost every sector lacks proper funding. Independent state cannot even fully funds its police and army. Cost of life has increased and issues in education and medicine has created discontent in society. Much of this was evident in 1920-1940 and that is a cost for being independent senior state rather part of large empire.

During the restoration of independence the old soviet communist elite made transition to democratic elite and still rules the country

This is claimed by the nationalists some of them members of Helsinki-86 and the Citizens Congress who wanted more radical way of restoration of independence rather than conventional way that was made by Popular Front that cooperated with Latvian communists who reverted to support the independence. That shows how weak and impotent the communist beliefs had become and most of the communist party members except hardliners steadily approved new reality and became capitalists and sometimes nationalists. This claim is partially true, however it seems that hardline nationalists were in no position to fulfil things their way and live on this accusation for rest of the two decades. What is unfortunate that no proper lustration was done and it was not done in any of the former Soviet Union. In Russia and Belarus it led to a rise of Soviet revisionism, in Ukraine and Georgia it lead to revolutions. In Latvia it simply created an unfortunate situation when some of the old elite tries to operate the country the old soviet way, some of not the best of their ability. Some of these people still tries to maintain good relations with Russia or are their agents. Larger issue is post soviet thinking that is characterized by fake nationalism and fake democratism and economic inability.

Majority of Russian speakers supported independent Latvia from USSR and were betrayed by Latvian government later by creating an apartheid state

In March 3 1991 a poll was made asking for supporting the independence from USSR. 1 227 562 voted for 411 374 against. In 1989 there was 1 387 757 Latvians, 905 515 Russians, 119 702 Belarusians, 92 101 Ukrainians, 60 416 Poles and 22 897 Jews. Surely it could mean that large part of Russian speakers were in favor. And Popular Front made posters asking Russian speakers to vote and try engage them. However, 24,69 of people voted against they were mostly ethnic Russians and military servicemen. Those who supported where mainly people who or their ancestors lived in pre war Latvia or who saw possibility of national cultural revival like some of the Jews.

Still  411 374 was large number and Latvian parties started to dwindle away from Russian speakers. After the independence the new ruling parties had a tough decision. Latvia could either start accession to  EU and NATO as difficult it seemed or try to stay close to Russia. And they feared that Russian speakers will not support course towards NATO and EU and vote for pro-Moscow parties. There already were such and wanted Latvia to stay ‘neutral’. Also in 1989 only of citizens were 52,0% were Latvians and it was obvious to try to preserve. So tough citizenship law was made to give Latvian citizenship to people who were born or had parents in pre war Latvia. Thousands of soviet immigrants became non-citizens.  Russia with its new support policy for Russian speakers abroad immediately condemned Latvia and called the situation in Latvia an apartheid.

Ironically the NATO and EU pressured Latvia to ease the citizenship law and it was gradually done. In result every year more non-citizens gained citizenship. In 2015 there was 262 030 non-citizens. Seems most of the Russian speakers do use their citizenship to support pro-Moscow parties as their support has increased since 2010 and in Riga there is ethnic Russian mayor. Was this support caused by staggering citizenship law? That is one of the reasons, while there some another referendum – in 2012 a referendum for two state languages were initiated. 273 347 people voted for. From 1 098 593 overall voters that is as much as opposition to independence in 1991 poll. It shows that for some people their views had still not changed since 1991 and the Latvian political forces were generally right about their weariness of the Russian speaking voters.

During 1990-1999 the government and ruling elite destroyed the Latvian industry and agriculture inherited from Soviet era on purpose

The first decade since regaining independence was hard one for thousands of workers. Large soviet inherited factories like VEF went into bankruptcy. Government in odds in being unable to maintain all post soviet industry decided to give away to privatization. In various cases the new owners were unable to maintain these factories, while others were simply looted. Many believed it was done on purpose for personal wealth of the new national elite. While some persons involved it was true, the collapse of the soviet industry can be explained for myriad of objective reasons. First soviet industry was all tied to Soviet marked that had collapsed, second the Soviet military had lot of grey orders from these factories that were now lost. Third that soviet industry was hopelessly backwards and foreign investors had no interests in them. A vile version that foreign companies saw new rival in Latvian industry and wanted to destroy it. However, it was so weak that they possibly could not rival Western companies for decades. It was far better to be bought by them for low price, but most like VEF old leadership refused. Fourth factor that new Latvian government that for two years was concentrated for almost impossible task of restoring independence now got in whirlwind of economic and social fallout that was caused by collapse of the soviet economy and rapid transition to free market. The government and new state intuitions were amateurs, often clueless of how to save the industry and made mistakes and fell for bates. Nevertheless it was a major social disaster that has not been fully recovered.

European Union continued to destroy Latvian economy, for instance it closed the Latvian sugar industry

When Latvia joined EU many hoped for immediate prosperity that did not come after 1992. However, many were disappointed by many regulations, directives and recommendations. Also EU investment was and is always under regalement and bigger countries still get the bigger cut. Not only that EU contributed to the closure of the Latvian sugar industry. This action however was not done because EU had vile intentions but because in 2004 it lost a case to World Trade Organization that allowed 49 poorest countries to export sugar into EU without fees and tariffs. To rescue EU sugar industry and compensate those who would be now dropped out of the market. EU offered the companies who can’t produce ton of  sugar for 404 euro were asked to leave the market and received compensations for their closure. And Latvian companies of centuries of experience were one of them. Now most sugar in Latvian stores are from Poland and is one of the most expensive in EU. It is rather unfortunate situation, but EU did that for many other countries because it was forced to.

As much of the EU positive and negative effect to Latvian economy there is many factors. EU has contributed to some sectors of economy and has hindered others. EU tries to work for common good and tries to keep balance and that balance is not always good for some countries. However, EU has no vile intention to sabotage Latvian economy if it had such it would let Latvia go bankrupt in 2008-2009, but obviously that would be against the common good and balance.

These were the some of the myths of the Latvian history. Every nation has its own historical myths and explaining them helps understanding the history better.

Advertisements

Comments Off on Great Myths of Latvian History

Filed under Historical Articles

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

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_model

Ukrainian photographer David Dubnitskiy, from Ukraine has made a series of pictures featuring VEF-206 radios

vef_radio_cehs0001

Mass production of radio cassette player models

vef_telefon

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

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

Latvia and the Belarusian Peoples Republic

Fragment of the map showing new Baltic republics and Belarusian People's Republic. Note the purported Belarusian state includes Latgale, eastern part of Latvia as her territory. Latgale is also shown as territory in dispute for Poland.

Fragment of the map showing new Baltic republics and Belarusian People’s Republic. Note the purported Belarusian state includes Latgale, eastern part of Latvia as her territory. Latgale is also shown as territory in dispute for Poland.

On March 25 1918 national and democratic forces representing the Belarusian nation proclaimed Belarusian Peoples Republic (Bielaruskaja Narodnaja Respublika BNR)  It was done in the spirit of other nations proclaiming independence from the collapsed Russian Empire. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia were example for Belarusians and Ukrainians who strived for their own unified state. However, during the crucial years of 1918-1920 the BNR did not survive the tides of war and ceased to exist. At the time of its short existence it had established relations with new Republic of Latvia and for a period of time BNR government was stationed in Riga. BNR had military and diplomatic mission working in Riga and its leaders placed hope on Latvian support. Latvia itself was caught in the tough battle for survival in war against Soviet Russia and pro-German forces and had complex relations with Poland so its relations with BNR at start were generally positive, but as BNR went into oblivion Latvia abandoned its support. Latvian main goals was to establish peace with Soviet Russia and settle issues with Poland so in the end BNR was more a obstacle for Latvian foreign policy and its diplomatic mission left Riga forever. This article marks the anniversary of Belarusian Peoples Republic and tells the story of short and forgotten Latvian and Belarusian relations between 1918 and 1921.

Belarusian nation has deep roots from medieval times when its territory was part of Lithuanian Grand Duchy. According to many historians mostly Belarusian ones, the leading elite of the Duchy was not Lithuanians but Belarusian ancestors. Later when Lithuania united with Poland Belarusian lands were influenced by Polish culture. Only after Polish partitions in 1772, 1793 and 1795 Belarus was integrated in spiral of Moscow. During these long years a distinct Belarusian language and culture evolved but it had to survive under heavy Russification policies and also Polonization. On 1918 Russian Empire had collapsed and was forced to cede Belarusian lands to Germany according to Brest-Litovsk peace agreement. An agreement that allowed nations within German occupied lands to decide their own fate. Similar to Baltic nations, there were people among Belarusians who saw chance to establish a national democratic state.

On December 5 – 17 1917 in Minsk (Mensk in Belarusian language) in All-Belarus congress a Central Belarusian Rada was formed however the Russian Soviet of Peoples Commissars in Petrograd rejected the rights of Belarusian autonomy. On January 1918 the All Russia 3th Congress declared the Rada an illegitimate. No repressions followed as on February 1918 Germans stared major offensive and took control over all Belarusian lands.  On February 20 a Belarusian Peoples Secretariat was formed with J. Varonka in the lead. On March 9 Belarusian Rada issued the creation of democratic Belarusian Peoples Republic. On March 25 the BNR proclaimed independence.

Germany did not recognize BNR as it regarded it as a Russian territory. Rada nevertheless created a War Affairs Committee with Kastus (Kanstancin) Jezavitau, in charge. In April Germans banned the Peoples Secretariat. Meanwhile Belarusian Rada fragmented in many leftist parties and with some difficulties created coalition government. Right wingers also joined pleasing the Germans and trade, industry and social welfare was transferred to Peoples Secretariat. BNR was recognized only by Ukrainian Peoples Republic so action was taken to get more diplomatic recognition from its neighbors. On October BNR made white-red-white flag as its official symbol and knight Pahonia the symbol of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was made as coat of arms.

Situation became crucial after Germany stepped out of war and BNR had real chances for independence. However, the Bolsheviks were boosting up offensive to retake lost lands. BNR made agreement with Lithuania. Many members of Rada joined Lithuanian Council (Tariba) and Belarusian Affairs Ministry was made within Lithuanian government with J. Varonka as minister. On December 3 1918 BNR moved to Vilnius while Bolsheviks were approaching Mensk. Soon Bolsheviks headed for Vilnius and BNR moved to Hrodno (Grodno). BNR was in conflict with Poland who had territorial claims on Belarus and after deepening tensions its government moved to Berlin.

On May 1919 Polish forces captured Mensk and BNR leadership moved there. Polish leader Pilsudsky urged Belarusians to join in common union with Poland and make Rada an autonomous body with jurisdiction only in education and culture. BNR rejected and asked for full independence. BNR Rada was weakened by breakup into BNR Supreme Rada and BNR Peoples Rada. Both Rada’s were lead by rivaling leftist parties and Polish government suppressed Peoples Rada.  After major issues BNR government moved to Riga. Poland did not recognized BNR while all three Baltic States, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Germany, Finland and Turkey had formally recognized.

BNR territorial claims were issue on its own as its included territories claimed by Russia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. BNR would include Smolensk (Smolinsk), some small portions of Latvian Latgale and Sēlija regions and parts claimed by Lithuania and Poland. There were some maps that included whole Latgale as BNR territory. The BNR borders were drawn according to Belarusian ethnic borders that conflicted with all neighboring states. Ethnically diverse Latgale was also under dispute by Poland and Lithuania, while Vilnius was major hotspot between Poland and Lithuania. The western Belarus main centers Hrodna and Brest had large Polish populations that wished to be under Warsaw. While neither Bolsheviks nor White forces of Russia did recognize any national independence at all. This created a problematic situation for Belarusian independence.

On autumn 1920 Polish and Soviet peace agreement talks were underway in Riga. BNR government observed that Poles and Soviets are taking part in partition of the Belarusian lands and were not successful in breaking up these actions. This finally made BNR conflicting sides the socialist revolutionaries and socialist federalists  agreed to form unified government. A government led by V Lastovskau became official representative of BNR and BNR Peoples Rada was renamed the BNR Rada. BNR left Riga on November 11 and made agreement on common military union against Poland and started work in Kaunas. On 1923 BNR government and Rada left Kaunas and moved to Prague where it remains until this day still coordinating opposition efforts against Alexander Lukashenko (Lukashenka) authoritarian government in Republic of Belarus.

BNR Diplomatic and military mission in Riga

BNR Diplomatic and military mission in Riga

BNR had high interests in Latvia. First contacts were made on summer of 1919 when BNR Minister of Interior Affairs K Tereshchenko arrived in Riga to establish relations with Latvia. He was interview by local Russian newspaper Rizhkoe Slovo where he issued his plans of creating unified front with Latvians and Lithuanians against the Bolsheviks. BNR had a small armed force incapable defeating Bolsheviks alone. On July 24 he met Kārlis Ulmanis the Prime Minister of Latvian Provisional Government who granted his plea to open BNR consulate in Riga. On August the consulate begun its work with B Shmikovich in charge later replaced by R Kazyachi. Consulate was located in Old Riga at Pils street. BNR flag was raised and consulate begun looking for potential BNR citizens issuing calls in press for Belarusian nationals to apply. BNR tried to level down its territorial claims on Daugavpils district until arrival of military – diplomatic mission to resolve the issue.

 The mission arrived on October 1 1919 with Kastus Jezavitau in charge. He was born in Daugavpils on 1893. On October 3 his delegation met the Latvian Foreign Minister Zigfrīds Anna Meirerovics, to whom he assured BNR support for Latvian independence and wished to join the planned Baltic Union. During the siege of Riga on October-November 1919 by pro-German Army of Bermondt BNR consulate remained in Riga. After Estonia made peace agreement with Soviet Russia BNR wanted to move the armed units led by general S Bulak-Balahovich or so called Belarusian corps to Latvia and use as BNR attack force. BNR stared talks with Latvian side to mobilize men within Latvia for BNR army however the talks failed. Only way to enlist people in Latvia into BNR forces was to make them BNR citizens.

During Battle of Riga and afterwards there was a brief positive period of relations between Latvia and BNR because of BNR representatives supported Latvians in many ways. However, soon many became aware of BNR claims on Latvian border areas most prominently the Ilūkste district (it was also disputed by Poland and Lithuania) and started to question the relations with BNR. As most part of Belarus was under Polish or Soviet rule with active combat actions these good relations were declarative that could change if BNR would gain control over Belarus. BNR could not convince Latvians to station Bulak-Balahovich forces in Latvia or include them into Latvian armed forces; Latvians only agreed them to transit to their homeland. A conflict emerged between BNR consulate and Latvian Army command. BNR consulate was on drive to recruit as much BNR citizens as possible without looking much into their motivation and ethnicity. In result some Latvians and Jews applied for BNR citizenship simply to avoid enlisting in Latvian Armed Forces.

On early 1920 Bulak-Balahovich forces of 800 men entered Latvia and stationed near Alūksne at Estonian border. Jezavitau tried to convince Latvians to include them in to offensive against Bolsheviks in Latgale but talks again failed. On January his unit was included in BNR but soon general broke ties with BNR and moved to Poland to join their army. When Latvian and Polish forces liberated Latgale from the Bolsheviks BNR wished to establish consulates in Daugavpils and Rēzekne. However, the talks with Latvian authorities failed. The Latvian military was skeptical about BNR citizenship registers for they served as tools to avoid army and as BNR only existed on paper there was great doubts. At this time much of Belarus was overrun by Bolsheviks and Polish armies on the Western side.

Latvian side became more reserved to BNR claims and requests. To sort out the Latvian and BNR border issues Latvian foreign ministry offered to create a Latvian-Belarusian commission.   Jezavitau requested secretary J Charpulka and consul B Shimkovich to work in commission, meanwhile Latvians did not rush to name their delegates and the commission never begun work. BNR most success in Latvia was laying foundations for national Belarusian minority by creating Belarusian culture and education society “Batjkovschina” (Fatherland) in Riga. Also a journal in Belarusian “Na Chuzije” (In foreign land) was issued, but only made single issue that contained information about Belarusians in Riga and BNR goals.

Latvian authorities started to feel colder towards BNR and Latvian police started to check BNR citizens to see how valid their citizenship is and even made arrests. BNR authorities protested and checks were stopped. Even some official BNR officials were arrested for instance secretary of BNR Rada J Mamonka was arrested at the Latvian border and 14 600 Russian Imperial Rubles he brought to Riga was confiscated. Border guards disregarded his BNR passport and also his diplomatic papers and only after protests he was released and money returned. BNR was not allowed to take part in Baltic States conference in Bulduri, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania voted against, while Latvia abstained. Only Poland this time because of partial loss of the Belarusian territory had nothing against the BNR participation. On August 11 1920 Latvia made Peace agreement with Soviet Union and relations with BNR was now seen as disadvantageous. The Polish – Soviet peace talks also took place in Riga and both sides were splitting Belarus in half. On October 20 after much Latvian pressure BNR started to gather its bags to leave Latvia. On October 27 BNR leader V Lastovsky pledged Baltic States to support BNR both politically and financially and wished that request for BNR war bases in Baltic States would be considered sometime in future.

On November 11 after making successful talks with Lithuania, BNR moved to Kaunas. Last BNR armed units stationed in Latvia left it after Polish takeover of Vilnius. Most of the Belarusian active community left Riga excluding   Kastus (Kanstancin) Jezavitau who became leader of the Latvian Belarusian minority. Belarusian minority received autonomy in education, had their own societies however on 1924 because of false accusation in separatism many of the Belarusian leaders including Jezavitau were placed on trial greatly straining Latvian-Belarusian relations.

The situation in Belarus between 1918 and 1920 was greatly disadvantageous to Belarusian national independence. It was against the interest of both Bolsheviks and Poland who regarded Belarus as their territory. Latvian relations with BNR were based on realpolitics placing Latvian relations with Soviet Union and Poland above BNR interests. BNR certainly had high hopes in Latvian support, but their powers to defend their homeland were too short and in the end BNR became a state on paper. We can only speculate what would happen if Poland would support independent Belarus and ally with it against Soviets. In the result a fourth Baltic State was lost. The Republic of Belarus that was formed after dissolution of the Soviet Union at first tried to relive the legacy of BNR by using its flag as its national symbol. A few years later Alexander Lukashenko dropped all references to BNR and switched back to Soviet symbolism and turned Belarus into authoritarian nation with Russian tanks marching on the streets on Belarusian independence day. But, BNR is not dead. Its Rada still works in Prague. The BNR flag and its coat of arms has become a symbol of the democratic opposition and praised by the Belarusian democratic youth. If democratic Belarus has any future then ideas of BNR will be its guideline for Belarus to become a full fourth Baltic State and member of Europe.

Flag of BNR in Riga in April 2014

Flag of BNR in Riga in April 2014

Selected sources:

Jēkabsons, Ēriks. (1996) Latvijas un Baltkrievijas Tautas Republikas attiecības. (1919-1920) Latvijas Arhīvi. 1-2. 

Comments Off on Latvia and the Belarusian Peoples Republic

Filed under Historical Articles

Paul Schiemann 1876-1944

schieman

There are people whose legacy has outlived their lives and whose actions and deeds were praised many decades after their deaths. During their lifetimes however, they were viewed with controversy, they had many critics and enemies and so as they friends and allies. However, only many decades later their legacy has been fully understood and they are again placed into spotlights. One of them is Paul Schiemann – jurist, journalist and political leader of the Baltic Germans. During his lifetime his liberal policies, support for independence for the Baltic States and campaigning for national minority rights were supported by some and opposed by many. He never scored mutual support among all Baltic Germans. He was a man of principle, a man with high sense of justice that caused him to lose the support of his fellow nationals and was forced to go into obscurity. At the end of his life he did the most humane act of his life – rescued a Jewish woman from the Nazis and was recognized as the Righteous among Nations. Because of memoirs left by his rescued Valentīna Freimane and historical research done by British historian John Hidden (1940-2012) the legacy of Paul Schieman one of the strongest voices for liberalism and minority rights protection has again been remembered and has scored his place in Latvian history.

Paul Schiemann was born in Jelgava (Mittau) on March 17 1876 in Baltic German family. His father Julius Schiemann was a jurist, known for his liberal views and who was against the majority of nobility in courts and state authorities. He was citizen of Russian Empire, but still considered himself a German patriot. However, the Russian government from 1870 started multiple reforms to weaken the Baltic German autonomy within the Baltic States. The new Russian emperor Alexander III started Russification policy and imposed Russian language as the primary language in high schools. The new laws also prevented the Baltic Knighthoods to nominate and dismiss court and police employees. Russian policy was to weaken the German power in Baltic province and impose more direct rule from St. Petersburg. Germans held their autonomy in education very dearly and were shaken by the flash of Russian nationalistic reforms directed against them. These reforms also affected the Latvian education.

Paul Schiemann because of these reforms took “underground” private lessons in Schiemann house in German only opposing Russifacation. In the end Schiemann and his elder brother Oskar went to Germany to get proper education. Here Schiemann finished school and choose further studies in jurisdiction. On 1896 he was drafted by the Russian army and sent to Caucasus. On 1898 in Lithuania he became the reserve officer of Russian army. On 1902 he graduated doctor’s studies in Greifswald. During his studies he enjoyed literature, philosophy and became passionate in theater. In Germany he was supported by his Uncle Theodor Schiemann a conservative historian who emigrated from Russia and worked in German Foreign Ministry.

Schiemann was bohemian who could smoke and drink to early morning hours and then show up for work as usual. He became involved in theater and even had affair with famous actress Hertta Weeren. Despite all this he graduated the doctor’s studies with highest excellence and applied for German citizenship. He was turned down for being Russian reserve officer. As foreigner he could not become a lawyer in Germany and therefore started carrier in journalism. Schiemann considered that journalism is the same fight for justice as in jurisdiction. His uncle Theodor considered his liberal views as illness wanted him to become an official German news editor in Japan. Because of this Schiemann took freelance job in newspaper in Norddeutsche Allegmeine Zeitung and took English lessons. But, he was turned down as the Russian relations with Japan were heading towards war. Schiemann’s Russian reserve officer was doing more harm than good.

After this failure Schiemann returned to Baltics and moved to Dorpat (Tartu) and discovered that according to Russian laws he needs more years in courses to gain lawyers rights. Instead he took job in journal Baltiche Monatsschrift and became a theater critic in Nordlivandiche Zeitung. After breakup with his lover Hertta he moved to work in Reval (Tallinn). There at local German newspaper he became the theater critic. On 1905 the revolution started in St. Petersburg and spread to Baltic provinces. Schiemann stood against the enemies of the Baltic Germans the social democrats that encouraged country side people to attack the mansions of the Baltic German nobles. He criticized the Russian government that their 17th October manifesto that proposed new parliament (Duma) as it did not weaken the violence and influence of the far right. In last months of 1905 the riots moved to country side. German noble mansions were burned, cities taken by armed mob. In response a punishment expeditions were sent by Russia and ended the revolution in bloodshed.  Despite that Schiemann called to use new rights to form parties and joined the Estonian Constitutional Party as secretary. It was sister party to Baltic Constitutional Party. Party was moderately liberal and tried to appease all social classes. 180 000 Baltic Germans lived in Reval so party needed also support from ethnic Estonians who considered the party as reactionary German movement and none of the Baltic Germans were elected into Russia Duma. On 1906 Schiemann started working in the Provincial Council that was made of representatives of nobility, farmers and city dwellers. However, the council had no effect on decisions within Baltic provinces and on 1907 the Russian Prime Minister Stolypin dismissed the second Russian Duma.

The Baltic Constitutional Party official newspaper was Rigache Rundschau based in Riga. The publisher Richard Ruetz asked Schiemann to join the editor team and Schiemann came to Riga. A cosmopolitan city filled with Latvians, Germans, Russians, and Jews and was politically diverse. Schiemann observed the growing national tensions between Germans and Latvians and he considered that only thing that can unite the both sides is equality in political and social rights. He was also started to oppose the conservative German forces that called for protection of the rights of nobility and was against the Latvian national movement. Soon he gained enemies from Baltic German reactionaries, was dismayed on their press as “red”. Opposition led to his worry of his publishers and his publications were reviewed. However, it was his strong worded articles that made the run of the Rigache Rundschau from 6 000 to 20 000 from the time period of 1907 to 1914. On 1907 he became the chief editor.

On February 2 1914 he married Charlotte Shuler and was well known in Riga and beyond, had many critics among the conservatives and he tried to gain some Latvian friends in his plight to unite both nations in the name of democracy. All this was interrupted when Russia entered war with Germany on 1914. Schiemann was Russian reserve officer and as it hard it was for him to fight against his German brothers his principle that “war can be opposed only in the time of peace”. He joined the Russian army, while his brother Oskar served the German. He was wounded during fighting while his newspaper was taken over by state authorities following anti-German campaign. On 1915 Lithuania and Courland and Semigallia was occupied by Germans and many of the local Germans and within Germany called for annexation of the Baltics. Schiemann although saddened by the anti-German campaign was still loyal to Tzar. Following the February revolution Schiemann joined the new Baltic German Democratic party. On December 3 1917 the German army marched in Riga and the party was banned. Schieman moved away from Riga and again joined the Russian army. After the bolshevik coup in St. Petersburg Schiemann felt grave danger and left Russia on March 1918 and made to his wife in Riga. The experiences of war made Schiemann strongly against both radical nationalism and bolshevism.

The Brest-Litovsk peace agreement on March 1918 included call for all German occupied Baltic territories to decide their future on the will of the people. However, German authorities suppressed the Lithuanian and Estonian governments who had declared independence. Meanwhile conservative Baltic German landtag sent letter to Berlin on April 12 1918 with plea to German Kaiser to unite Baltic province under single Baltic State that would serve as German protectorate in union with Prussian crown. The plea gained widespread opposition within German Reichstag who wanted to weaken the Kaisers power and feared such move would endanger peace with Soviet Russia. Schiemann who arrived in Riga on March was against the Baltic State was arrested by occupation authorities as a pro-Latvian spy. He was placed in house arrest until in August he moved to Germany.

Gaining financial support from his friends in Germany and his new book “The Fiasco of the Russian Democracy” he came to Berlin and started to acquire a net of supporters for liberal ideas. Schiemann supported the Baltic independence from Russia and insisted that fate of these countries lays on the will of the local majority. Meanwhile he warned about the rise of the Latvian Social Democratic workers party that would only lead to bolshevism. The enemies of Schiemann were alarmed by his influence in Germany, his uncle Theodore was also against his ideas. However, on November 11 1918 war came to an end with revolution in Berlin and ceasefire on the Western Front. The Baltic German conservatives could no longer hope for their Baltic State instead on November 18 1918 Latvia declared its independence. As the new Republic promised equal rights for all nations in Latvia Schiemann was in full support of the new state.

Schiemann moved to Latvia and joined the democratic German forces and worked together with the new Provisional Government led by Kārlis Ulmanis. Soviet Russia had declared war on Germany again and was preparing to invade Baltic States. Latvians were forced to accept that German army and Landeswehr the Baltic German land guard stays in Latvia and fights with them against the Bolsheviks. The new Baltic German National Committee hoped to gain privileges for Germans from the new Latvian state and opposed the Bolsheviks.  Their demands for national parity with Latvians were declined by the Latvian Provisional government. That led to conspiracy by German reactionaries and General Rüdiger von der Goltz against the Latvian government. On April 16 the baron Hans von Manteuffel and Goltz Iron Brigade made a coup against the Ulmanis government, but failed to arrest it. The new pro-German government led by Pastor Andrievs Niedra was not supported by French and British who helped Ulmanis government to escape on ship Saratov. Most Latvians were against Niedra and Goltz. On May 22 Germans chased the Bolsheviks away from Riga who had occupied since January 1919. On June 22-23 the tides of war moved against German reactionaries as Estonian and Latvian forces defeated the Iron Division and Landeswhehr and forced to sign ceasefire and give up the Niedra government.

Schiemann returned to Latvian politics formed union with moderate conservative baron Wilhelm von Firkss who became the leader of the National Committee. With his efforts and allied pressure Ulmanis government included two Baltic German ministers in his government Edwin Magnus as Justice and Robert Erhart as minister of Finance. Firkss founded his own conservative Baltic German Peoples Party. Baffled by many liberals he chooses to co-operate with conservatives while still trying to achieve common ground with Latvians. Schieman wanted Baltic Germans to be united to gain as much as they can from the new Latvian state, but by democratic means. He again became the chief editor of the restored newspaper Rigache Rundschau that became the main Baltic German newspaper in Latvia and his newspaper was read also by Latvians and his voice was heard and his views were always known. He became leader of the re-founded Baltic German Democratic Party.

One of his first achievements was influencing the new State Education Law. Karl Keller was appointed as deputy for Minister of Education and he and his team influenced by Schiemann made important proposals to gain school autonomy for national minorities. The new law was accepted on December 8 1919 and created autonomous school authority within Ministry of Education for German, Russian, Jewish, Polish and Belarusian schools. Germans were assured now that Latvians will not harm their education as it was done by Russians in the past. That eased the German relations with Latvian state.

Latvia survived the attack from the West Russian Voluntary Army that was made from German Freikorps and White Russian forces looking to destroy independent Latvia once and for all. Frikss managed to persuade Landeswehr from joining the war against Latvia while Schiemann campaigned for Baltic German support for Latvia during the critical days of war.  When the war was over the new elections were called for Constitutional Assembly. The election law allowed only political parties to enter elections and the Baltic German National Committee was abolished. Three new Baltic German parties emerged: moderately centrist right wing Baltic German reform party, conservative Baltic German party lead by Frikss and Liepāja City Unity party.  Schiemann undertook efforts to unite all parties under common Baltic German list for better results in the elections.

His efforts were successful creating the German Party Committee and in every election until 1931 the Baltic Germans gained more seats than they share of national population could allow. No other national minority except Poles could achieve such unity. Russians making 10% of the population had division between Old Believers, Conservatives and the Liberals. Large percent of Russian rural population living in Eastern regions were illiterate and therefore politically inactive. Jews making 4% of the Latvian citizens had division between Zionists and Orthodox Jews, while Zionists had their own left and right wing division. They also spoke different languages, Russian, German and Yiddish and often could not find common ground. Poles 2% of the population had one central party and support from the Poland, but during the 1931 conflict with Latvian government their split up in two rival factions. Germans were 3% of the population and their common goal was to preserve their national rights and keep their presence within Latvian politics and economy.

However, it proved to be tough and often un-successful battle. Schiemann was first elected into Riga Town Council and then moved to Constitutional Assembly. The main tasks of the Assembly were to write new constitution (Satversme) and realize Agrarian reform. The reform involved in confiscating large plots of land from German noble families. For centuries the majority of the rural land was owned by German nobles. Latvians at first were subjected to them, when serfdom was abolished they had to either rent or buy small plots of land from them. The new reform wanted to expropriate their land without compensation. For many of the noble families such reform would be disaster. Frikss and Schiemann proposed to nobles to give their land voluntary in return for compensation. Their proposal was turned down and all they gained was that land owners could at least keep 50 hectares of land and delay the question of compensations. Latvian Social Democrats left the parliament room in protest, but the Baltic German fraction voted for Agrarian reform. Many of the German conservatives felt betrayed by Schiemann. He himself understood the needs for reform, but saw it as weapon for aggressive chauvinism.

Kārlis Ulmanis compromise with national minorities led to his government downfall and new one by Zigfrīds Anna Meierovics that based on more nationalistic premises was not supported by minority parties. Schiemann also went on tour to Germany to convince Baltic German émigrés that resistance against internationally recognized Latvia is pointless and combated the propaganda spread by exiled reactionaries. In his tour to Germany and Austria he joined discussions for common national minority rights amongst the League of Nations. He made proposals for the new constitution and two of them to guarantee free usage of the minority languages and guarantee to create autonomous associations for cultural proposes were accepted in the constitution. However, the legislators failed to vote for second part of the constitution that was focused on civil rights and determined equal rights for man and woman, freedom of press and political rights and also defined national autonomy. Therefore national minorities were cut short of promises to ensure their protection of rights and  state refused to define their rights in detail as they had promised when it joined the League of Nations. Schiemann was disappointed and called the constitution half-baked. His efforts from now on were only not to defend the rights of Germans but all national minorities of Latvia and beyond.

On 1922 the new Latvian parliament Saeima was elected. Schiemann along with Frikss, Karl Keller, Egon Knopp, John Karl Hahn and Manfred von Vegezack were first elected Germans. The parliament was in deep division between right wing parties, left wingers, regionals and minority parties. Schiemann was elected in all following elections in 1925, 1928 and 1931. He took active part in parliamentary work and legislation. He a lot of time protecting the minority schools as many parties of the Latvian right wanted to limit school autonomy. He did not manage to win battle against the Latvian parties for the main churches in Riga. The Catholic St Jacobs cathedral was the first to be overtaken by the Latvian Catholic clergy, and tough campaigns for Lutheran Dome Cathedral and St. Peters church followed resulting in referendums. On 1924 Social Democrats finally achieved that no compensations should go to nobles with confiscated lands.

The nationalistic Latvian forces saw Schiemann as one of their main adversaries, while conservative Germans were opposed to Schiemann’s liberal policies that they called appeasing Latvian chauvinists. He was forced to be in regular power balance struggle to keep his ruling position within German Party Committee and his editor seat of the Rigache Rundschau. The Latvian governments were unstable and Schiemann had to choose which new coalition to support or not. On 1927 he was even asked to form the government but as he understood he would not receive enough support he refused the offer.

Latvian cartoon about Paul Schiemann and his German Party list. From Svari 1928.

Latvian cartoon about Paul Schiemann and his German Party list. From Svari 1928.

One of the main failures faced by all minority parties was failure to create laws for national autonomy. In Lithuania and Estonia such laws were made. While in Latvia one of the main reasons for failure was that each minority made their own autonomy proposals. The national autonomy proposals not only included cultural autonomy, but also permitted own national councils and use of minority language in state affairs. None of the proposals from all sides ever came to voting floor. In defense of Latvian parties one must state that some of these proposals were too radical and would mean “state in state” situation that was undesirable. On 1925 Schiemann joined the First Congress of Organised Ethnical Minorities (Nationalities) in European Countries in Geneva as and served as its Vice President from 1929 to 1936. Congress goal was to form a link between the ethnical minorities of Europe. And to afford their responsible heads an opportunity of regularly exchanging views and constantly co-operating for the purpose of throwing light upon, and solving the problem of, nationalities in order to eradicate the principal cause of European wars. Schiemann’s views became more internationally known. During his time in the congress he developed many new theories about the defense of the national minorities and liberal democracy. Many of his ideas came to realization many decades later. For a brief period when Germany was influenced by powerful liberal politician Gustav Streseman the Foreign minister with his special  focus on Eastern European countries and policy towards national minority as similar to Schiemann, there was hope for democratic and liberal Europe. Streseman met Schieman many times and supported his ideas for national cultural autonomy in Europe. Streseman died on 1929 on early age and since then the situation begun to deteriorate for Schieman and national minorities.

The 1929 financial crisis took one of the strongest hits on Germany and created a outburst of protest and resentment towards moderate and liberal policy creating opportunities for National Socialists. The rise of nationalism was eminent in Latvia too and was present in both Latvians and Baltic Germans. In this crucial time Schieman fell ill with tuberculosis. His constant smoking habits made him to move to rehab in Davos, Switzerland. There in 1930 he learned of first major Adolf Hitler party victory in the German elections. During this time the famous French politician Aristide Briand who came forward with his plans for European economic and political union. Schiemann was against any union that would exclude Baltic States and was skeptical of such union if it would be based on old 1914 principles.

Meanwhile the Baltic German parties in Latvia became more conservative and influenced by events in Germany. This was also a reaction to rise of Latvian nationalists who called for “latvianization” of economy and education. On 1931 first Baltic German Nazi organization Ostgruppe started activity in Latvia. While Schieman was in Davos many of his colleagues became found of the Nazi ideas, read their newspapers and made contacts with them. Schieman from his rehab reacted by sending strong worded statements to his newspaper  Rigache Rundschau increasing conflict with Nazi sympathizers.

Meanwhile the economic crisis deepened in Latvia and Latvian nationalistic parties started campaign to expropriate Dome cathedral from German Lutherans. Ailing Schieman was forced to gives his MP seat to V Sadowsky who next behind him in his party list because he could not take part in the vote for the church. The campaign created a wave of anti-German sentiment and alienated German fraction from the Latvian government. In the end on 1931 despite failed referendums the Dome Cathedral was removed from German Lutheran parish and they could only rent the church.

On 1931 last parliamentary elections took place in Latvia. Schieman returned to Riga, and Germans scored six seats as usual. However, the new nationalistic coalition led by ex moderate social democrat Marģers Skujenieks created more doubt and was not supported by Schieman. On 1927-1928 Marģers Skujenieks was Prime Minister of left wing coalition that was in good relations with Schiemann and achieved trade agreement with Soviet Union.  Now one of the new Skujenieks government ministers of education Atis Ķeniņš started an offensive against minority schools. Atis Ķenins wanted to make Latvian language as official state language as until now the status of Latvian language as official was more de facto than de iuire. He also wanted to increase the use of Latvian within minority schools and called Latvia a “Eldorado” for minorities. After the collapse of Skujenieks government many of his ideas were not realized, but growing tension only increased Baltic German support for Nazi ideas. Instead of using liberal ideas against nationalism and chauvinism as Schiemann did many turned to use same weapons against their adversaries. Also many Baltic Germans scared by the rise of Latvian nationalism believed that strong and unified Nazi Germany would come and protect them. Sciemann was strongly for creation of un-national state – the state with no dominating nation that focuses on cultural and national equality in all matters of the society. For years he fought his efforts, but as of 1933 it seemed his hopes of such states would never be realized.

On 1933 Adolf Hitler took power in Germany. Rigache Rundschau was also co-financed by Germany and question was raised should this newspaper be led by openly anti-Nazi editor? As pressure grew the Sciemann’s health begun to weaken again and he was forced to go to rehabilitation to Austria. The Baltic German parties became penetrated by local Baltic German Erhard Kroeger and his Movement (Die Bewegung) that was supported and financed by Berlin. On 1933 Wilhelm von Frikss one of the main leaders of the Baltic Germans died and Schiemann lost a valuable ally. Schiemann left the editors post of his beloved newspaper and also left the German fraction in the parliament and lost his leading role in Baltic German politics. The 1933 was endgame for Schieman. On May 15 1934 Kārlis Ulmanis and his supporters took power by coup and created a personal dictatorship. All parties were banned and that meant even greater Nazi influence on Baltic Germans as now National Socialism was seen as resistance against Ulmanis dictatorship.

Paul Schieman could no longer live in Latvia and immigrated to Austria that was still democratic but also influenced by Nazis. Schieman was alarmed by persecution of Jews in Germany and was saddened by the breakup of the Congress of Organised Ethnical Minorities. In Austria he continued journalism and followed events in Europe and Latvia with deep concerns. On March 1938 Austria was invaded annexed by Nazi Germany. Paul Schieman was on the Nazi dossier as potentially dangerous liberal activist and Schieman had to return to Latvia where lived in political isolation. He was isolated both by the state and his Baltic Germans who were convinced that Hitler would come to liberate them.

On August 23 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop pact shocked them all. Hitler in exchange for one front war on Poland made agreement with Stalin. Latvia was assigned to Soviet Union as its sphere of interest. On September 25 1939 in Soppot SS Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler informed the leader of the Baltic German Nazis Erhard Kroeger about the secret protocols and shocked Kroeger begged not to leave Baltic Germans behind in case of Soviet invasion. Himmler was surprised by such concern and promised to speak to Hitler about it.  On October 6 1939 Hitler decided that he needs Baltic Germans for colonization of the recently conquered Polish lands and also wanted to keep them away from Soviet repressions. The repatriation came as surprise to everyone including Schieman who resisted this. Schiemann’s protests were heard by Swiss and Swedish press he was against that Germans leave their country behind making great economical problems caused by their departure and move to country with imposed ideology alien to our religion and sense of morality. Meanwhile majority called “that that who stays it’s not real German!” Schiemann called repatriation a death sentence to Baltic German culture. But, only few listened to him. Latvian government endorsed the repatriation and official press celebrated the event. In just few months the most historic national minority in Latvia with strong cultural roots became extinct. Majority of the Baltic Germans were sent to occupied Poland. Schieman could not he stayed in Latvia doomed for soviet occupation.

Schiemann was opposed to Communism as much to Nazism. Latvia was occupied by Soviet forces on June 17 1940. Kārlis Ulmanis decided not to resist and was removed from his presidential seat and replaced by Soviet agent Dr. Augusts Kirhenšteins. New “elections” were issued and Schiemann even wrote a letter to Kirhenšteins to inquire his intentions and future of Latvia. He was recommended to join democratic list by led Atis Ķeniņš, but he refused to add a German candidate. And better off as soon the democratic list was declared illegal and all the candidates arrested. A single list was elected with 96% results issued by Moscow before votes were finished counting. As Soviet Union was still in good relations with Nazi Germany Schiemann was spared for a while. First who were repressed were Latvian politicians and intellectuals. Schiemann unable to work as journalist stayed at home and made notes where he criticized dumb and deeply flawed Bolshevik regime. He was horrified by the mass deportations of June 14 1941 where 35 000 people were sent to Siberia. But, it was just beginning of the storm.

On June 22 1941 Nazi Germany began war with Soviet Union. On July 1 1941 German army moved in Riga. Schieman now had to face Nazi terror in face. The new occupiers included Latvia into Ostland reichcommissariat administered by Alfred Rosemberg. Latvian general district was administered by Otto Heinrich-Drehsler. Germans created self ruling bodies filled with Latvian collaborators and Baltic Germans who came back to Latvia. One of them Hugo Vitrock was appointed as mayor of Riga and was one of the strongest Schiemann’s opponents before the war. However, because Schiemann’s illness they did not considered him dangerous and instead just prevented him from journalism and kept him in the house arrest. Schiemann was under observation however, he did one last thing to oppose the Nazis – he provided shelter for young Jewish girl Valentīna Friemane. Freimane was born in February 18 1922 in Riga was a German speaking Latvian Jew. She spent her childhood in Berlin and Paris. On 1941 she married and when war came she took shelter with her husband. After he was arrested she hided in many other places until she ended up at Schiemann’s house.

Schiemann was sick with tuberculosis and diabetes and was under care by Jewish doctor Idelson who was rescued from Ghetto, but during German evacuation from Riga caught and shot. Valentīna Freimane spent with him his last days. He dictated her memoirs and she managed to gather up his memoirs up to 1919. Schiemann treated her with dignity and respect. On 1943 the Germans started to form Latvian Waffen SS Legion, Schiemann was visited by guests who described the Legion as heroic patriots. After the left he came over to Freimane’s shelter and complained over fools that wish to combat one evil with other. It 1944 and Soviets came even closer to Riga. Before his death he was visited by representatives of the Latvian Central Council who opposed the Nazi regime. They offered him to sign manifest for restoration of independence in hope that after the war such would be possible. Schiemann rejected signing for “another castles in the sky”. Schiemann was afraid that Soviets when they come back would arrest him and his wife, but he could not leave as he was too sick. On June 23 1944 at the age of 68 Schiemann passed away. Valentīna Freimane moved to another family the Melnikovs and spent last months of the war. His wife gave her his photo and few his books, they never met again.

Valentīna Freimane with her husband

Paul Schiemann funeral took place June 26 1944. A small funeral was taken place under observation by Gestapo. Month later his wife Charlotte was ordered to evict her house and moved to Germany. Remaining Schiemann’s archives were taken by his wife and later moved to the Baltic Central Library in Lineburg. Paul Schiemann was viewed with controversy by surviving Baltic Germans. Many had resentment for him not joining repartition and there was still a sense of conservative even post Nazi views among the Baltic German exiles.

Valentīna Friemane became doctor in arts and now lives in Berlin. She helped to spread the story of Schiemann as Jewish rescuer and on 2000 the Israeli Yad Vashem awarded Schiemann with title Righteous Among the Nations. On 2010 she published her memoirs “My Atlantis” where she described her refuge and last days of Paul Schiemann. 140 years later after his birth many of his ideas of un-nation state, minority rights and cultural autonomy has been realized. Many of these ideas are under danger from new wave of nationalism and humanitarian crisis. Paul Schiemann called “the defender of minorities” is one of the symbols of interwar Latvia. Only now we can fully review his legacy and place him in the spotlight of the Latvian history.

Selected Sources:

Hidden, John. (2004) Defender of Minorities. Paul Schiemann. 1876-1944. London. Hutrst&Co.

Šīmanis, Pauls. (1999) Eiropas Problēma. Rīga. Vaga.

Freimane, Valentīna (2010) Ardievu Atlantīda. Rīga. Atēna.

Comments Off on Paul Schiemann 1876-1944

Filed under Historical Articles