R. Valatka — Latvian referendum is not the last echo of Soviet occupation
Posted by editor on 2/20/12 • Categorized as Baltic States, Language, Minorities, Neighbours, Opinion, Politics, Rimvydas Valatka, Society • 
Print This Post
•
The referendum on making Russian a second official state language in Latvia failed. Over 77 percent of the nation said no to a plan devised in Kremlin. Latvians emerged as highly public-spirited: as much as 71.49 percent of all voters came to the polls, even more than in the vote on the EU membership. How could it be any other way? The point, therefore, is not that the referendum legitimately failed. The central issue is the fact that such a referendum, so humiliating to Latvians, could take place in a NATO and EU country in the first place, Rimvydas Valatka writes in 15min.lt.
22 years ago, neither Moscow, neither its fifth column in Latvia would have dared to subject Latvians to such an event. Now they did. That is what must be most disturbing. Not only in Latvia, to Lithuanians as well.
The referendum reminds us that Moscow has not given up hope of at least partial revenge in the Baltic states. Instead of encouraging Latvian Russians to finally acknowledge the change in reality and successfully integrate into the society, Russia continues to pit part of the population against the Latvian state.
Russian-speaking population in Latvia – as well as in Estonia and, in part, Lithuania – are still kept hostages to Vladimir Putin’s imperialist policies in the Baltics. Is it surprising that Latvia takes them, as a matter of course, to be a potential fifth column? And this will continue to be the case as long as Moscow does not change its attitudes. Russia is harming its own compatriots in Latvia. This is sufficient evidence for how little Kremlin actually cares about Russians’ situation in Latvia. Local Russians are nothing more but a revenge tool in the hands of Moscow’s imperialist statesmen.
Right after the referendum, chairman of the International Affairs Committee of the state Duma Konstantin Kosachev proclaimed: “Despite the actual figures in the referendum, I think that the results are victory for those who fight for Russians’ right in Latvia.”
That means: Russia has no intention of paying attention to the referendum results. Insinuations and ideological warfare against the sovereign state of Latvia will go on. It must be said to the credit of Latvia’s Russian-speaking citizens that many of them are not being fooled by Moscow’s games and therefore voted against making Russian a state language.
But perhaps it would be very European of us to make all tongues used in a country into official state languages?
Let’s move for a moment to Russia, that beacon of European values so concerned about European standards in an EU country. How would Kosachev, Putin & Co view similar suggestion to have a referendum on making, say, Tatar a state language in Russia?
The question is purely rhetorical, no need to consider is seriously. Heresies of significantly smaller scale put Mikhail Khodorkovsky in jail, got Anna Politkovkaya shot and made even young lawyers die mysteriously in Butyrka prison. And yet, Tatars (as well as Udmurts and Bashkirs) have been autochthon people in their lands since 13 century, long before Russians came there – the “liberation” by Ivan the Terrible was at least three centuries away.
Meanwhile in Latvia, the first Russian settlers came in late 18 century – after the partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Republic. They are colonizers (not to mention those who came to Latvia during WW2, sporting NKVD uniforms and settling in Riga’s best houses, recently vacated of their original owners) even according to the most generous EU doctrines regarding national minorities.
Let’s forget the question raised so emotionally by Latvians: why 70-year period was not enough for them to learn Latvian? This is a rhetorical question too. The real issue is this: how come those Latvia’s Russians who do not speak Latvian could live in the country for the last 22 years?
The answer to that is a credit to Latvia as a state extremely tolerant towards its national minorities. Why? Could someone with no Russian possibly survive two decades in Russia? Anyone who has ever visited Russia knows well: no chance in hell. It took several months for Baltic deportees in Siberia to learn Russian. And they didn’t take this to be a humiliation: knowledge is power, not hindrance.
What’s the number of state schools in Russia offering education exclusively in Udmurt, Chuvash, Yakut, or Chechen language? Alternatively, let’s put it thus, if you will: How many state schools in Germany instruct only in Kurdish, Turkish or Serbian?
Latvia, meanwhile, has around a hundred exclusively Russian schools. That is one of the reasons why Russians there can get away so easily without knowing a word of Latvian. Moreover, thousands of Latvian Russian-speakers – Germans, Frenchmen or Italians would find that completely incomprehensible – take pride in not knowing a word of Latvian.
And I am not talking about ordinary workers or former military officers of the occupying army. Ten years ago I was part of a group of journalists from the Baltic states visiting China. Latvian delegation included Svetlana, a very loud reporter who had settled in Latvia after graduating from Dnepropetrovsk Institute with a degree in rocket science. In meetings with the Chinese officials, she would happily scorn Dalai Lama and, in between meetings, she did not choose her words in slandering the Latvian state.
All because she was made “second-rate.” What was preventing her from becoming first-rate? “Just imagine,” Svetlana would fume, “the government is making me learn Latvian!” Big deal – learn it, take an exam, and that’s all it takes to become a citizen with full rights? “Now that is not happening and you’re a nationalist like all the Latvians,” the journalist of a Russian-language paper in Latvia exclaimed, red with indignation.
How can Latvian soil carry characters like that? Politically incorrect question indeed. But, as it happens, Latvian soil carries thousands like Svetlana. How long would Russian soil put up with Latvians of analogous persuasions? Would it be tolerated in France, Italy, Germany?
Probably not. Than why should it be takes for granted in Latvia? Why people professing their hatred for Latvia are allowed to pick on historical wounds by holding anti-Latvian referenda?
The answer to that is far from politically correct, but that’s how I see it. It is only possible because part of Latvia’s Russians regard their current situation in the country as something temporary, hoping that, one day, “X” will come and “liberate” them. In other words, they, too, perceive themselves as the fifth column in a NATO and EU member state. The column that – due to the way the EU, and Germany with France in particular, indulge Moscow – is growing more adventurous every day.
Several simple conclusions can be drawn from the referendum in Latvia. Conclusions that Lithuanians – even those sincerely concerned with our national security – grow increasingly ignorant of.
1. We shouldn’t delude ourselves that Lithuania or any other Baltic state could actually improve its relations with Russia. Policies and goodwill of the Baltic states have no bearing on normal relations with Russia. Only Moscow’s does.
2. Currently, Russia has no desire of keeping good relations with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Kremlin’s ambition is the same as it was before 1990 – redrawing of maps at the expense of the Balts’ freedom. In Moscow’s view, the Baltic states must submit to Russia’s will and become its political satellites.
3. How long is this going to last? Unless Russia becomes a democratic state, it can go on for quite long. A case in point is the fact that Russia has not yet signed a peace agreement with Japan, even though it’s been almost 70 years since the war ended. All because of four tiny Japanese islands in the Kurils that Russia couldn’t care less about.
4. Moscow has, does and always will exploit our own – and especially the EU’s – political laxity and illusions of the younger generations about Russia’s goodwill. By the way, those who march and chant “Lithuania for Lithuanians!” are just as helpful to Moscow as the actual fifth column – except that the majority of such “patriots” are completely blind to the fact.
5. The same thing that was attempted in Latvia with the referendum, will be attempted in Lithuania with the mesalliance between the Electoral Action of Poles in Lithuania and the Russian Alliance – something that can only be called treason of freedom by our Polish brothers. What’s worse, not even Warsaw seems to be aware of Moscow’s puppet show. To be more precise, Warsaw is blinded by romantic illusions that Lithuanian Polish leaders are essentially Polish, part of the in-group, and is unwilling to see Moscow’s divide-and-rule scheming.
6. The influence of Russian pop culture – and the accompanying politics – can be diminished by strengthening our own media. Unfortunately, the conservative government of Andrius Kubilius, led by narrow party interests, has done everything to make the Lithuanian media collapse or fall into the hands of pro-Russian forces.
7. Be that as it may, Latvians slapped Kremlin in the face last Saturday. And they presented Lithuanians with an excellent example. Especially for those who sadomasochistically rejoice in all those polls suggesting that Lithuanians would choose full stomach over freedom of their country. Latvians demonstrated very clearly that, when it comes to real threat, the Balts unwaveringly choose freedom.
(20 votes, average: 3.30 out of 5)
Loading ...
to iseeyou
One hand in mean Russian Professors and Associated Professors
to iseeyou
If you are so clever, please try to compare for example, Latvian and Russian Professors and Associated Professors at RTU Chemical Dept. before 1990. Sure one your hand will be enough. The same with other faculties and LU. May by I wrong with modern Automation dept.
Alex Sergeev – Keep lying till anybody gives up on disproving your lies. Good strategy!
I have answered to Valdis concernig of his education at Latvian University. Unfortunately you have not seen a smile after my sentence about technical education
“I learned in Latvia University at Soviet time and I had compulsory courses in Russian (math. statistic and others), in despite that I learned in Latvian group.” was his sentence
In contrast to Latvian University, RTU (former Riga Polytechnic Institute) had more strong lecturers in most of the disciplines that time (1970-…) . And I can not remember any russian lectors in scientific disciplines. They were native Latvian speakers , not Russian and did lectures in Russian or Latvian language depends of the group of students. Even Political Economy lecturer was latvians (and by the way a member of Communist Party) -:)
And absence of native Latvian speaking lecturer in mathematics was not political. It was simple why. There were not latvians educated for teachinghigh mathematics that time. Literature, Art, Chemistry, Phisics(less), Medicine, Architecture etc -yes. In Mathematics not yet.. Or nobody wanted. Too low salary for mathematics teacher….And not too many positions.
Concerning technical education. Yes there is Riga Technical University established at 1862 by Russian Impery and education in German.It offered degrees in agriculture, chemistry, engineering, mechanics, trade and architecture. At Soviet time there were more than 3/4 University staff as native speaking Latvians. You hardly got professorship without knowledge Latvian Language (SOVIET UNION TIME (!), occupation) -:)
“Only 17,7% of the electorate supported the Russian language as a second official language. That is the main thing.”
Hm. Deaths exceed births in Latvia by almost 1.6 to 1, 0.1% of the Latvian population flees the country every month, and the “main thing” in Latvia is confirming the inferior status of the Russian language??
The mind boggles at the self-destructive hate.
Latvians voted whether to have Russian as a second state language today. If I were a Latvian citizen, I would have voted against it, since I believe it is the responsibility of of the State to preserve and uphold what was a diminishing culture. But this should in no case be at the cost of Russians’ rights (who may learn Latvian and some history if they want to achieve citizenship).
I lived in Latvia, struggling to comprehend, but coming from another large culture. Of course it would have been more practical to learn Russian. But in ‘92 when I had a choice, i picked Latvian, remembering what the monolithic European culture had done to American Indians.
I taught Political Science at Univ. of Latvia prior to their first elections. There are various principles of justice that could be used to justify several outcomes. Recently, democracy and self-rule is predominately promoted.
I think of Mr. A.Sergeevs correct assessment that wonderful courses were brought from talented ethnically Russian persons. I met one amazing biologist who created an anthology of frogs – truly remarkable. I met the developer of MiG engines at the Aeronautical Institute in Riga. This is where the Kremlin had financed and sent Sudanese, Cuban, Yemeni (South at the time), various Warsaw Pact countries to come to learn after having mandatory classes Russian classes first in Stalingrad or in Kiev – all taught in Russian. After talking with the former NATO coordinator for the Baltics, I learned that in any instance of Russian military presence in the Baltics, NATO is ready. Classes for military personnel is taught in their native language and others. In Germany jet pilots know Russian, German and English. To advance in Soviet times in government jobs one needed Russian, period. Mr.Sergeevs perhaps forgot the purge from Kremln that happened in Latvia during the 70s of Latvian Soviet leadership because they were thought to not be close enough to the Kremlin? Learning Latvian meant in higher education accepting mediocre advancement or giving in to the totalitarian regime. Perhaps people forget that poltical science classes that I taught in ‘92 were only previously allowed to qualified Party members? I had to initially teach them in English but now they are taught there in Latvian.
Language and culture are only part of the picture as resource scarcity and population growth occurs. The Kremlin chose Latvia as a strategic center for military observation and deployment, but also to drive a wedge in the Baltics to diminish the nationalistic will of Estonia and Lithuania. After talking with the daughter of an architect in Riga, I learned about plans that were drawn up for not only subways to accommodate the new Russian emigres, but to move the military command center to Riga in the 70s.
What I learned from Germany’s unification is that culture is stronger than politics. The people in eastern Latvian speak Latgalian and admire Russia and it is part of their history but not their identity. Having Russian as a second language is expedient for them . What is even more amazing is to meet younger people in Latvia, for whom the issue of learning Latvian is an understood standard or need, and having friends of different ethnic backgrounds (Latvian, Ukranian, Russian, Roma, etc) is not an issue. Much like how questions of race or color in the US are almost gone.
I am a permanent resident of the EU and Latvia. If learning Russian would have been necessary for me, after establishing a home there, taking the Latvian language exams, what Russian would have defended my right to not learn Russian? My sons take Russian language classes too, btw. – and Chinese, & Spanish. They have a choice.
What to do? I want my fellow Russian permanent residents to have the right to vote in local elections like in Estonia and Sweden. I support that if Russia wants to fund schools in Latvia like what is done in Finland for Swedish classes, then great. But taking the political track record of Russia in Latvia, and their assertions that minority rights of Russians are in jeopardy when Latvians and their cultural peril is at stake..I find it to be a vehicle for self-agrandizing propaganda by some Russian politicians. My personal goal is to support Latvians, Lithuanians, and Estonians, but not to the detriment of any ethnic Russian. If any of my fellow permanent residents want to become a citizen, then like me they can decide for themselves if it is important enough to accept the responsibility to take some history classes, etc. We may see in about 20 more years that this will become a non-issue, since Soviet healthy system created the effect that is still felt today of an earlier mortality rate for elderly (than in Europe).
To Alex:
“….Technical education have been started by occupants -:)” WTF????
Of course here was quite a good technical education also in Soviet times- Military structures needed specialists- but good one was generally available in Russian.
Highest education
The highest education in the territory was available many years before russian occupation. The first university within territory of Livonia -included also Eastern part of Latvia)- Academia Gustaviana or University of Tartu was established in 1632 and the first students immatriculated between 20–21 April 1632. For western part of Latvia – popular was University of Königsberg, established 1544.
The oldest University in Russia -St. Petersburg was established 180 years later, than was available to Latvians- in 1724, in Moscow- 1755. In none of these universities here was no education in Latvian, but at least Latvians had opportunities to study here.
About education itself
The 1686 church law (kyrkolagen) of the Kingdom of Sweden (which at the time included Riga, Vidzeme region also Estonia etc) enforced literacy on the people and by the end of the 18th century, the ability to read was close to 100% here (not all of them could write).
Of course literacy rate in Latvia was radically lowered after it was occupied by Russia (Vidzeme & Riga 1726, Kurzeme – Zemgale regions at 1795).
Russia forced to russification of Latvia – In Latgale (incorporated in Vitebsk Gubern) it was forbidden even to print books in Latvian (1861(5)-1904), and starting form 1885 here was forbidden to even speak in schools in Latvian between Latvian pupils (not to talk about education in Latvian).
Education also was heavily influenced by serfdom practicized by Russia also in territory of Latvia, but again- it was abolished in Kurzeme – Zemgale in 1826 (30 years after these regions were annected by Russia), but in Russia as whole (and Latgale) only in 1861.
But, even under this hard conditions, Latvians were very well educated (to compare even with western Europe, not Russia)
According to Population Census of Russia in 1897- in Latvia was 1 929 387 citizens (NB!- Latvia is only country in Europe, which due wars and occupations has the same number of citizens after 115 years….)
Literacy rates were as follows:
Vidzeme (North-east part of Latvia)-94,6%, Riga (capital) – 83,1%,, Kurzeme (west part of country)- 88,6%, Latgale (problematic region due historical russification policy)- 50,1%.
If we talk about Russia itself- St. Petersburg had literacy rate 71%, and average in Russia – 21%. In bordering with Latvia Vitebsk & Pskov Guberns- it was average 14%
***
Probably, you forgot, that in 18th century even 3 of Presidents of Academy of Sciences in St.Petersburg were originated from Latvia, (and one in 20th century;-)
***
The first book in Russian was printed in Russia in 1564 «Апостол» ( «Деяния святых апостол списана святым апостолом и евангелистом Лукою») In Latvian- “Katolu katechisms”- in 1585
***
In 1920. here were 134746 Russians in Latvia. If you would like to live in Latvia more than only in vacations – please, learn the language and history. Latvians will help you
to Ainars
On the other hand Finland could find courage to have Swedish as the second state language. Is there any significant difference?
Everyday I speak several languages (including Latvian) and I enjoy it.
Although I can’t keep silence when somebody tries to impose the dictatorship of majority. (It’s obvious that the solution of non-citizenship problem and language issue would harm the political position of the current elite, but it could stop Latvian speaking and Russian speaking population from ethnical voting )
If Russian would have a regional status in Latgale where it is widely spread and supported, I think that LR will benefit from it.
NB And please don’t confuse Russians and Russian speaking population.
To Alex: Please be at least honest.- here is impossible to have “the same” rights if one nation has 1,5 million speakers in small teritory to compare with 300 mill. Russian speakers with largest country in the world and with large colonies outside it.
It is incredible, that latvians in Daugavpils and other cities with large Russian population even AFRAID to be Latvians in their native country. Results are very well seen on the map- even here is NO regions in Latvia, where % of voters reaches necessary level, Latvian activity is very small.
Language is not a problem, but one of solutions to deal with them.
=> to Mr. Valdis.
In my reply I am speaking about school and high education. May be we have been educated at the same time.
I can only agree that for some technical subjects there was not jet educated Latvians Lectors. Technical education have been started by occupants -:)
Main my idea is that why Russian teacher at Russian school is forced now to teach young man in Latvian but not in a native tongue? And teach special therms after understanding subject as was before?
=> to Ainars: This referendum was not against Latvian, but for making Russian with same rights as Latvian.
Russian is not a foreign Language for at least third part of population
I think Mr Valdis lies or he doesn’t have complete information on the subject.
In Soviet times there were several high schools without Russian flow (like art academy, or chemical flow in RTU, etc). If somebody wanted to graduate in art he/she had to study in Latvian. Moreover Latvian culture were heavily promoted and supported. My father took part in many festivals and competitions of that time and almost everywhere the ethic component was the most important one. Could you name me any Latvian group (Russian speaking) of 70-80 who was awarded with the first place? None? Why? There were a lot of talented Russian groups.
And I’ve heard of any language inspections or the need to have a prove of language knowledge in those terrible times. And what about nowadays?
To Alex.
Please, do not falsificate facts! Here is NO any regions in Latvia, were Russian language got 90% or even necessary support >50% (from all citizens who have rights to vote)!
Map of the results is available here (figures you can check within http://www.cvk.lv) :
http://ritvars.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/nobalsosanas-kartes-juridiska-un-politiska/
And situation shows other thing- Latvians afraid to participate in regions with large Russian populations
For second Russian Language (from all voted):
All Latvia: FOR 24.88%, AGAINST 74.80%
Riga (Capital) FOR 36%, Against:63.6%
Very good article.
Up to first INCORRECT comment from MR Sergejevs.
It’s absolutely incorrect to compare soviet occupation time in Latvia. We are talking about territory of independent national state.
As we know- the last colonial state in Eurasia- Russia does everything to suppress national awakening of tens of occupied nations within “its” borders.
Your comment / comparision could (COULD) be valid, if Latvia occupied some part of Russia and force Russians to learn Latvian.
Situation is vice versa – alien people, from which majority is naturalised in the last 20 years under existing Law, tries to use citizenship against nation ruled only by their chauvinistic wishes.
Interesting to know that the majority of Latgale (east region of Latvia) supported Russian language (districts like Zilupe resulted in 90% support and the second largest city of LR Daugavpils voted >80% FOR).
While 15% of adult population (probably native Russian language speakers) had no rights to take part in the referendum (their citizen rights were withdrawn in the early 90-th by the ethnic Latvian majority).
Anyway under the present situation there are no doubts that any other language could become the 2-nd state language. However it would be stupid to reject that a big part of Latvians (mostly native Russian speaker) want their language rights and cultural identity to be respected. The minimum respect would be ratification of the UN convention on minorities in full (w/o restrictions and remarks).
Please, don’t lie Mr. Sergeev! I learned in Latvia University in Soviet time and I had compulsory courses in Russian (math. statistic and others), in despite that I learned in Latvian group. I was pressed to speak Russian after high school in my job because of many Russians working in company. And finally – there were a lot of different free Latvian language courses within last decades. Mr.Sergeev – if you don’t know, than make some research. If you simply lie – than shut up, please!
Author has forgotten that at Soviet Union time every Latvian speaking could get school and high school education in mother Latvian Language. He has forgotten that at 1991 one third part of population of Latvia has lost own citizenship by own government law . He has forgotten that there wasn’t any free Latvian Language courses after that time. He has forgotten that initially ultra-nationalist VL party wanted to initialize plebiscite to switch all school education into only Latvian language… and many more
Only 17,7% of the electorate supported the Russian language as a second official language. That is the main thing.