“Those who want to understand in details understand why Latvia is holding to its position. If simple conclusions are drawn and details are not considered, one may not understand why Latvia was unhappy for its liberation [from the Germans]. What was liberation for some, meant the beginning of the third occupation for others. It is a fight with a windmill as for Don Quixote, but this fight has to be fought,”
– Indulis Berzins, the Latvian ambassador to the UK, on the March 16 march commemorating Waffen SS veterans.
I don’t understand the first sentence. And is Berzins “a” ambassador or “the” ambassador?
But, all told, what is to disagree with? This history, especially here, is difficult. It is quite impossible to step in someone else’s shoes and understand why they did what they did.
From the RU side, to back down from protesting this march, would be to finally admit that some people in LV did not want to be liberated by them. Liberated, yes.. but not by the ussr. That would negate much of what they believe about RU and the ussr.
Is it only Latvians who fought on the German side that are remembered, or “parade” on March 16? I would think that all Latvians who fought in the war, on either side and at any time, should all be remembered and commemorated on that day, or any other suitable day.
Pierre,
You would get a big argument from lots of folks when you say “fought on the German side.” I think some number would argue that many (maybe most) were fighting on the LV side. I don’t totally hold with it myself and always point out the existence of the “third way.”
Tom, I believe the first sentence means that if you care about details, you’ll know why Latvia is holding the position it is holding when it comes to March 16. I’m not disagreeing with the sentiment of the sentence, but with the invocation of the image of Don Quixote fighting windmills in an imaginary world. It sounds like March 16 is a farce with Sancho thrown in.
We can debate the liberation aspect. After all, the Soviet troops did chase out the Nazis in this part of the world. However, my biggest gripe is what happened after the war was over when some countries in eastern Europe became under the influence of the Kremlin while others – like the Baltics – remained illegally annexed into the Soviet Union, in part, thanks to the Allies.
“I would think that all Latvians who fought in the war, on either side and at any time, should all be remembered and commemorated on that day, or any other suitable day.”
I think this is the right approach. Attempts have been made to make November 11 into that day.
“I think some number would argue that many (maybe most) were fighting on the LV side.”
I think that’s nitpicking. There was no Latvian side when the World War II began.
Oh – and I amended the article before the word ambassador, Tom.
There was a LV side as it was ending- Latvijas Centrala Padome? Kurelis group?
And, as far as a joint/many-sided commemoration- when is there agency? Doesn’t such a commemoration suggest that the “just following orders” meme is right? Isn’t someone responsible for the holocaust, Katyn etc? Why should someone who died in a concentration camp be memorialized at the same time as someone who killed her?
You could commemorate all the fallen soldiers in all wars – it could include war for independence and the second world war regardless of their uniform. True, some Latvians took part in atrocities, but I suspect it was regardless of the side they were in. So commemorate those who died for the country, not all those who fought.
Latvia’s case is different than, say, Estonia’s where Tallinn was empty when the Soviets arrived in 1944. Instead of the Nazi flag, they took down the Estonian tricolor from the central buildings. I don’t know of any kind of movement toward forming a government in Latvia in the period between the German and the Soviet occupations back in 1944.
Tom, what’s the “third way”?…
The third way is the Latvian Central Committee (its documents in Latvian can be found here. Yet it’s unclear a) how many people supported it; b) why it was unsuccessful to move as far as Estonia in creating the provisional government once the German forces left.
Paldies Aleks.
Note to self: finish reading “History of Latvia: the 20th Century”.
Hey. I would like to ask you a few questions for a paper I am writing on press freedom. I could not find how to reach you on your website. If you could contact me at Jastruck85@gmail.com that would be great. Thank you.
The Next Leg Down: Sovereign Default
In case the title of this post does not clarify our position quite well enough, we would like to state, in definitive fashion, that the global economy is at best halfway through its deleveraging/bottoming process. The past week has brought with it a sharp increase in bullish sentiment, based upon the assumption that the negative economic data is slowing in the sheer intensity of decline. We are told that, historically, sharp drops are followed by sharp rebounds. Unfortunately for the professional prognosticators, the current downturn is unlike any economic reality in the post World War 2 period.
Within the current situation, there are several Countries that face a legitimate, imminent risk of collapse. We have seen this scenario unfold in Iceland, a relatively insignificant country that in this situation merely serves as a precursor for what is to come. The next leg down in the global economy will occur in conjunction with the collapse of one of the Countries that is currently at risk of collapse.We refer specifically to Hungary, Latvia, Ireland, Greece and Spain. We fully expect that two of the listed Countries will default on its sovereign debt and descend into a period of relative chaos. We have listed the Countries based upon the likelihood of a violent disruption in the Country’s finances, ultimately resulting in the referenced sovereign default.
We are quite sure that the aforementioned issues are inevitable in nature, and will serve as a catalyst for a renewed sense of panic with respect to the state of the global economy.
I don’t know if anything can be done about March 16. Moving it to another day or making it more inclusive would undermine the whole idea. This is a day of rememberance for those who faught against the Soviets. There is no way around that. You can try sweeping it under the rug and pretty it up, but it would still not change a thing. As such, I have no problem with Berzins’ comments. It is a Quixotic quest. I don’t have an answer, but hoping that there can be a “third way.”
And I think Aleks claim that there was no Latvian side when WWII began is nitpicking and not entirely correct. WWII began in 1939 when Latvia was still independent. Or are you, like most Russians, starting the war in 1941 when Germany invaded Russia? They aren’t one and the same. Either way, there most definitely was a Latvian side. To claim anything else is, IMHO, nitpicking.
Andrej,
Who will remember those Latvians who fought among the soviet ranks? Are they no less victims of the horrors of war? Late in the war, when both sides were looking for bodies, literally I mean, geography more than anything else determined on whose “side” a Latvian would fight. They essentially drew a line in the sand and, yet again, decided which Latvians would be on whose side. That line was in some sense arbitrary, an accident of fate. Why should this line now determine which Latvians we commemorate on March 16?
Pierre,
That wasn’t my point. My father is one of those Latvians who fought on the Soviet side. March 16 is what it is. I am all for remembering all of those who died in WWII, but we can’t gloss over the fact that there were quite a few Latvians who fought against the Soviet Occupation. Which side they fought on in this conctext is of little consequence other than the simple fact that they couldn’t be both on the Soviet side and fighting against Soviet Occupation. The reasons who ended up on which “side” and why are very complex, but not in the context of March 16th. To me this just reinforces the Quixotic nature of the debate.
“Or are you, like most Russians, starting the war in 1941 when Germany invaded Russia?” Not at all. The war started on September 1, 1940 with the invasion of Poland. Latvia has lost its independence by then.
As to creating a day for all – it’s been tried. It hasn’t picked up. Yet. The Bear Slayer day is that day.
Aleks,
I’m sure you meant to write September 1st, 1939…
Hey..sorry but I did not know how to write you privately….how about this?? http://www.estonianfreepress.com/2009/04/trichet-estonia-will-not-enter-the-eurozone/
April fools!