Kalba minint atkurtos Lietuvos nepriklausomybės 25-ąsias metines

Kalba minint atkurtos Lietuvos nepriklausomybės 25-ąsias metines

Štutgartas, 2015-03-16

 

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren!

Sorry, ich will Englisch sprechen, darum mein Deutsch zu schlim fuer solche Rede ist.

25 years have passed from the day when Lithuania, after long decades of Stalinist occupation, got truly democratically elected Parliament to announce the people’s will: “from now on, Lithuania is independent again!”

 “Again” had to remind of the Republic o Lithuania, full member of the League of Nations, until 1940.

 The words “Independent again” were followed by: “and her Supreme Council begins to implement the full State sovereignty”.

 After reading that already voted Act, with solemn words in the face of the Parliament, I made a little realistic clarification inside of the occupied country: “Lithuania is now already free in law and spirit. Congratulations! Estonia will be free as well! Latvia will be free as well!”

 Indeed, we were the first and most consistent in the ten Soviet Union, pointing out everything basic at once and to the end.

 The Kremlin reacted with anger and repressions, demanding to revoke Lithuania’s decisions. Lithuania had to withstand blockades, coercion, nerve wars and the bloodshed in Vilnius, January 1991, but did not step back.

 In one and a half years, 17 September 1991, Lithuania, having regained international recognition, acceded to the United Nations. In December 1991, due to Belovezh accords of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, soon ratified by the rest of the twelve then so-called “republics”, the Soviet Union “ceased to exist” – that was an official formula. M. Gorbachev announced stepping down from the post of the president of the non-existing entity. In 2000, the US Congress adopted a Concurrent Resolution of both Houses commemorating the 10^th Anniversary of Lithuania’s restored independence and praised Lithuania for her leading role in the disintegration of the former USSR.

 Allow me to underline two points of that story.

 The first is that Lithuania initiated, together with Latvians, Estonians and Russian democrats, the official review of Stalin-Hitler “pact” of 1939, which appeared to be the beginning of the Second World War; this was done by the USSR Peoples Deputies’ Congress in 1989. The 50^th anniversary of that criminal conspiracy was then marked by the greatest manifestation of two million people joining in a live chain from Vilnius to Tallinn. This event could also be seen from the Moon, not only on our planet. Addressing to the whole world, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia demanded for freedom! – This had a special meaning for Germany, as one of the signatories of that infamous act.

 In mid-summer of 1989 I had a chance to visit Bonn, and thanks to the honest assistance of the friendly Abgeordneter Herr Lewandowski von Hessen, to meet in the Bundestag the Chair of its Foreign Affairs Committee Dr. Hans Stercken. He offered me indeed a big piece of his time. In that conversation I touched upon a hot spot – the forthcoming anniversary of above mentioned Pact, informing that the Soviet Union was ready to evaluate and denounce it with the secret protocols – thus why the Bundestag could not do the same?

 I am pretty sure that the content of our talk was referred to the Bundeskanzler and echoed in his speech at the Bundestag commemorating the 50^th anniversary of the beginning of WWII. It helped us as well, in the consequence, to get the decision by the Congress of People’s Deputies in December.

 So, Helmut Kohl addresses then the Bundestag:

 “We, the Germans, do bring the extreme responsibility which does arise from, because Hitler after conclusion of that by many called Devilspakt attacked Poland by war. The then agreements presented shameful violation of independence and territorial integrity of Poland, the Baltic States, Finland and Romania. That blow at the international law, no less than the right for self-determination, was and cannot be justified by any reason.”

 “The Hitler-Stalin pact appeared to be the product of cynical game of two dictatorships. One of them disappeared forever in the hell created by himself. The Soviet Union still stands – 36 years after Stalin’s death – in the middle of the painful process of self-challenge”.

 It was stated most officially about the whole German-Soviet accord to begin war in Europe, plus diabolic conspiracy contained in additional secret protocols.

 Please, take here one Nota bene.

 The secret protocols in which Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were defined “in a case of changes of their political structure” as a zone “of interest” of the USSR, reflected the totally and traditionally imperial mentality of that Russian and Communist state. Nothing about the eventual interests of those nations! No idea that there were the people; no, only the lands (territories) and maps. Stalin drew a new state border between the USSR and Germany, across Poland, and the bloody deal was over. The people could be deported or massacred, what’s that? Territories were important while treated as “zones”.

 A propos, that mentality remains unchanged until now, while Russian president (badly legitimated, unlike the Ukrainian one) claims Ukraine his own land, the zone of prevailing interests of Russia, thus warning others not to approach it under the terrible threat no less than nuclear war. Blackmail, maybe, but the mentality is of the same shine as that of Stalin.

 To note, legislation in putinist Russia was adopted by the puppet Duma 10 years ago that Russia will defend its interests in all world by all existing means. Unfortunately, this did not attract any attention of that very world, rather sleepy.

 Then, in 1989, we succeeded in denouncing in principle such self-declared “right” of the bandit, but 25-26 years later one can see the claim of international lawlessness loudly revived. Je, Ukraine does belong to us, at least as a satellite province, etc. If you disagree, damned Ukrainians, you have the war.

 Everybody knows, who wants to realize, what is going on there.

 But let me put still one more point here. That is the second one I wanted to underline.

 Lithuania did not allow the gorbachevists to leave – via democracy – only the Communist satellites of Central Europe, but to affirm for themselves all the conquests inside the Soviet Union.

 Let me quote now the remarkable notes recently made by Paul Goble, former official of the US State department, well aware of Baltic matters.

 “The triumph of Sajudis in the March 11,1990 elections had three major consequences, all of which deserve to be remembered. First, they showed that the revolutions in Eastern Europe were not going to end there but would spread into the USSR via the Soviet-occupied countries. Second, they underscored the power of democracy and of the ability of peoples committed to freedom to ensure that the transition to it could be peaceable and non-violent. And third, they showed that in the face of such an expression of national will, the powers arrayed against it, however impressive they might have appeared at the time, were and are powerless.”

 “The Baltic countries were the problem. For Moscow, they were part and parcel of the USSR and part and parcel of the Yalta-Potsdam world. But for the West, as US non-recognition policy made clear and as President Gerald Ford emphasized when he signed the Helsinki Final Act in which Moscow placed so much hope, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were occupied countries and their occupation must be ended at some point.”

 “Obviously, many in Soviet-occupied Estonia and Latvia looked to what Lithuania achieved on that date, and so too did many in Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and elsewhere in the evil empire. They understood what various leaders have called “people power”, and they knew that whatever difficulties they faced, it could not be denied. As such, the Lithuanian election inspired far more people than only Lithuania.”

 P. Goble has also noticed something peculiar about the US policies. “They stopped talking about America’s non-recognition policy and began talking instead about “the right of Lithuania to national self-determination” as if the two things were equivalent. They weren’t and aren’t. /…/ Indeed, one could say that by this verbal shift Washington unintentionally played a key role in promoting exactly what it did not want to do at the tie and exactly what the Moscow conservatives most feared. The Orange revolution in Ukraine, the Rose revolution in Georgia, and the Maidan again in Ukraine would have been impossible if that had not happened, and Vladimir Putin’s revanchism would have been unthinkable as well. Thus, the voters in Lithuania’s first election in more than half a century played a fundamental role in the events of the rest of the last century and the beginning of this.”

 And something about today.

 The former “bloodlands” of Central Eastern Europe got realized (or someone realized them) thirsty again for more blood. Thus the new epoch, new chapter of European history was turned. That new epoch counts time from 2000, and its name is Putin’s wars. Chechen Republic, the Republic of Georgia, now Ukraine. Some compare this consistent beginning with previous epoch of Napoleon’s wars. Only the difference is that Napoleon’s epoch left such worthy heritage as Napoleon’s Code, while Putin’s wars do result in devastation and disaster plus total lawlessness. Look at Eastern Ukraine assaulted by Russia war dogs, destroyed and turned into one more world disaster zone.

 Postwar system of international security lays in trash. The hopes that no revanchism will cause new and endless wars have failed. What we meet today, is enormous revanchism of post-colonial Russia, which is psychologically not able, short to insanity, to cope with its imperial legacy. It also brings us to the main global problem, while Russia has shifted back to authoritarianism and neototalitarianism. Ir became a part or even driving force in global growth of influence of undemocratic, anti-Western forces (powers). It looks now as if we have now two “Boko Haram” movements, one in the Middle East plus Nigeria and another in the Kremlin, both full of animosity and hatred to the damned “West”. Psychologically they are similar, thus nobody can stop them from approaching each other, as well as from consolidation around. So, democracy versus undemocracy (or anti-democracy) - that is division of our world today, a gross danger for the Western civilization.

 There is no time to be naïve and shortsighted.

 Those who don’t dare to contain the aggressor are just encouraging him and taking even greater responsibility for the consequences. No doubt, the latter are and will be escalated. Actors-observers who did not want to pay less will pay more. Getting less and less, of course.

 Passive involvement of the West into Moscow’s war is no better than the active one; the latter would be even preferred, if you were on the right side. Passive involvement, on the contrary, which begins with appeasement of the assaulter supplying him with the weapon and skills, - to remind of “Mistrals” – may become even worse by putting you on the wrong side.

 Today Lithuania celebrates 25 years. Will it have 25 years more?

That will depend on maturity or degradation of the West – the recent post-Christian civilization. When losing its identity, it may become captive of opportunities, including growth of the efficiency in the evil of an opposing aggressive undemocracy. That would be a developing catastrophe not only for Lithuania.