Speech of Vytautas Landsbergis in the event "The present meets the past: to commemorate the 70th Anniversary of the Soviet Mass Deportations"

Excellencies Ambassadors,

Dear colleagues,

Ladies and gentlemen!

We are commemorating now very sad and terrible page of Lithuanian, Baltic and European history, which happens to be most often defined as "tragedy". Yes – for victims and nations, taking the Baltics, as they entirely became victims of Soviet-Nazi conspiracy in 1939-1940 and then of occupying Soviets' red terror including mass deportations of tens of thousands out of families' homeland and as intended, for ever, in 1941.

The tragedy was caused not by natural disaster of type of tsunami or the earthquake. It contained a human (really inhuman) action, thus also the historical background and legal sense. So, there we need to use other definitions in terms of real human history what you may see here around, and international awareness and justice.

As for Lithuania, recently we became fully aware and acknowledged from a research that the blow of June 14, 1941, was only the beginning of cool-heartedly planned genocide.

The first task, as announced by Soviet marshal Timoshenko just two days after the occupation of Lithuania, was rapid "sovietization". An obstacle for that should be the people of their independent country – those of independent mind, not captive one yet. They should be deported at the first place, far away from their homeland, and the preparation of needed lists was ordered. In the spring of 1941 the lists were prepared and contained over 230 000 names of "enemies". Just with a beginning of action, the occupier in Kremlin changed his mind to take entire families of each enemy, thus number of victims should exceed 750 000. Among them were not only Lithuanians by origin, but also Jews (along the communities, the highest percent) also Poles of Lithuania as well as those refugees fromPolandgiven a shelter inLithuania, and now again taken out by Stalin, the ally of Hitler. Some cabinet philosophers do consider today that soviet genocide, then abrupted by war and later, until fifties, limited by opportunities only to some 150.000 of deportees and similar number of imprisoned plus tens of thousands executed, is only partial endeavour, and thus does not deserve definition of genocide.

The first deportation of the people from captive Lithuaniato occupying USSR in June 1941 was extremely cruel, because for a half of victims it became equal to capital sentence by hunger and exhaustion. The children were among those weakest, and men, separated from their families for extremely hard labour in deadly conditions, perished en masse. Only some 10% survived. Neither the families nor those survivors of soviet cold and hunger "cameras" received a penny of due compensation.

To add, there are plenty of history and policy thinkers in the West, who suppose that Soviet crimes against humanity, even exceeding in numbers, cannot be comparable with Nazis' crimes. It would be worthy to remind them that German nationalsocialists were just younger pupils of soviet commisocialists, and learned from those experienced the good examples of industry of extermination. SS and Gestapo cooperated perfectly with NKVD and NKGB (both merging in future KGB) until the break-up of a war between Soviet-Nazi allies, in 1941. Just before it, Nazis proposed Soviets to get some millions of expelled European Jews in a course of the forthcoming big cleansing. The Soviet response was a cold sentence: we have quite enough of them.

Going back to more "local" inhumanities, as mass deportations of population from theBaltic Stateswere renewed and continued under the second and long-lasting Soviet occupation, let us consider now some legal approaches.

It was in 1998, after the period of ex-communist rule in post-cold-war independentLithuania, when our Parliament "established and resolved that mass deportations from the occupiedLithuaniato the territory of the occupying state – theUSSR– constitute a grievous crime manifesting the characteristics of intentional and deliberate genocide".

Subsequently, the Criminal Code of the Republicof Lithuaniawas then amended by entire section of War Crimes. The Article 334 of the Code stated that, I quote "deportation, in time of war, during an international armed conflict or under the conditions of occupation or annexation, of civilians from the occupied and annexed territory to the territory of the country which effects the occupation or annexation or to a third country, shall be punishable by imprisonment for a term of 5 to 20 years or life imprisonment". 

For our Western sister-nations in theUnion, who never experienced such Soviet policies of slow genocide, it looks, seemingly, a little bit exotic and unbelievable. Only that, along with fearfulness to the state continuator ofUSSR, may explain the strange manoeuvring inside of European Commission during the three last years. There was a need to establish the equal criminalization of the public denial or gross trivialization of the war crimes, genocide and holocaust committed by any of both big totalitarian tyrannies inEuropeof 20th century. As for denial of Nazis' crimes there were no great problems, but Soviet crimes and eventual denial of them should undergo hearings and analysis of EC before putting the case as Community Law.

The investigation of opinions by EC being presented to the Council to issue its own Draft opinion provides us now with some surprising results.

The national replies to the probably misguiding questionnaires by the Commission, which mixed the issue of war crimes and crimes against humanity with criteria concerning the genocide, allowed the EC to miss important and simple points. It seems for the Commission, to be "impossible or difficult to envisage a situation where the condoning, denial or gross trivialization of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes /.../ could be incriminated" when being defined by reference "to criteria other than" genocide. Why the extermination of war prisoners or slaves in a death camps committed by criteria other than race, colour and religion disappears from the framework of gross crimes without prescription, remains too big puzzle for a common mind.

Possibly, it affected badly the Council as well, because the Draft Council conclusion of June 8th of this year "shares the view" that as for crimes of Communist regimes, supposedly, "the necessary legal conditions for adopting an additional instrument are not met at this stage". The real obstacles to work on that additional instrument stay there not mentioned – what and from where could they appear? Draft Council conclusions notes, anyway, that Commission despite such failure, "will keep this question under review".

Hopefully, it would be kept in a light of single soft formula by the Council, that "the denial of such crimes should be treated according to adequate standards". Adequately, you may suppose, for both Nazis and Soviet killers and for gross trivialization of their adequate deeds. Then we could appreciate the future final Report from the Commission on "The unmocked memory of the crimes committed by totalitarian regimes inEurope".

Until the recent draft becomes the document of the EU, ladies and gentlemen, there is yet a time and space for a better job. The sound voices inRussia, including those of the Orthodox Church, about the need of destalinization and recognition of the crimes of the past may appear helpful as well.

Thanks for your kind attention.