It appears that Parliament is preparing to install questionable legislation, which will legitimise dual citizenship. Few laws receive so much attention and require so many amendments. Some amendments, proposed at the last minute before the ballot, circumvent vigorous examination by the voters: that is how many questionable ideas, reflecting narrow interests, become law.

Even worse, dual citizenship legislation is planned to operate on exemptions.  Exemptions for NATO and EU citizens. Exemptions for the neighbours.

Dual citizenship is a moral dilemma, like bigamy. You can claim loyalty twice, but it is impossible to be dually loyal. Who, in the end, decides to whom the dual citizen is loyal – to Lithuania, the US or Russia? If those seeking dual citizenship have no idea what they are seeking, why steer them to a moral dead end?

Even friends have conflicts; let’s hope that there will be no war and that those with dual citizenship will not be forced to choose which side to support. The privilege to vote and participate in referendums, however, can be more dangerous that outright war.

Let’s not forget that in the last twenty years the Lithuanian geopolitical situation has not changed. Are we ready to have hundreds of thousands of “dual” Lithuanian/Russian citizens? Recall recent events in Georgia, and Moscow’s foreign policy of defending its citizens in a neighbouring country.

We are still stuck with that Soviet way of thinking, that whenever we leave for overseas, someone could forcibly seize our citizenship. With a Lithuanian passport one can live and work not just within EU. Some think that it is convenient to be a citizen of the country of residence. They should not be punished nor encouraged by awarding them Lithuanian citizenship.

Cries of despair come in regard to the children, born to Lithuanian parents residing in Ireland, who automatically become Irish citizens.  Alas, do not forget cases where children born in Lithuania to mixed families were denied Lithuanian citizenship. These cases are not the result of Lithuanian law, but the result of Lithuanian bureaucracy’s criminal incompetence.

Much legislation in Lithuania suffers from the inherent problem of not taking into an account what it costs to implement the law in practical terms. Perhaps if people knew the real cost, many would change their minds. Until the chaos of health insurance and social welfare are sorted out, the cost of dual citizenship cannot begin to be estimated. The cost of dual citizenship could be impossibly difficult to bear.

Some political parties quietly hope that by enlarging the number of voters overseas they will receive more votes. Is this an illusion? Departure is often a sign of protest. The agenda of courting votes overseas is risky and politically irresponsible. Why should those residing overseas have any say in how Lithuania is run, how its tax payers’ money is spent?

It is important to know the difference between citizenship and nationality – they are closely related, but ultimately separate. Lithuanians can love a country without being citizens. Citizenship firstly and most importantly bestows responsibility and duty and then consequently rights and privileges.

The Lithuanian legislators of the Constitution purposefully built in safeguards, which protect Lithuania from a return to the post-soviet community and limits dual citizenship. This is a wise position, which has taken into account threats reflected by recent events in Georgia.

The proposed citizenship legislation creates ways to surpass the Constitution and creates an example of political nihilism. If it is because we are ready for dual citizens – of which I am very doubtful – let’s do things appropriately and change the Constitution. Parliament must set an example in following the law. Only then can it expect that from ordinary citizens.

Arguments that opinion polls show that Lithuanians support dual citizenship is meaningless at best. Why has there been no referendum?  Let’s not forget that opinion polls depend on cleverly crafted questions.  If we ask an average Lithuanian if he or she supports children of Lithuanians residing in Ireland remaining Lithuanian citizens, few would disagree. But how would that average Lithuanian react to the proposition of supporting that non-residents, not contributing tax to the Lithuanian economy, help to decide how Lithuanian welfare is distributed?

During the last year of Soviet occupation I visited Rome where from the hands of Kazys Lozoraitis I received a Lithuanian Passport. That document gave me no privileges and only minimal protection in crossing the Soviet border. Nonetheless, that passport was a symbolic connection with independent Lithuania. I do not know how many such passports Lithuanian consulates in Washington, London and in the Vatican awarded. One thing is clear, not many then were requesting Lithuanian passports.

Gintaras Aleknonis, commentator and host of the Public Radio programmes, Dean and Lecture of the Mykolas Romeris University, former employee of the Radio Liberty.  The comment was published in lrt.lt on 10 June

Translated by D.T.

A Minister of Foreign Affairs who did not manage to check how much confidence he enjoys, did a mistake that makes us to entertain doubts about his diplomatic wit. Even though this might be only a coincidence, however, this kind of mistakes are not justifiable for a former negotiator for EU membership, Lithuanian ambassador in Washington and London, one of the most professional our diplomats.

It is also hard to understand how Vygaudas Ušackas understood one of the most important problems that are rooted in Lithuanian diplomatic service that is under his leadership. While having a look from aside, it is hard to get a rid from an impression that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was too much close with the State Security Department, and this impression was even more sustained by a free migration between these two services. Links between these two institutions are natural as well as cooperation between them.

However, these links have to be based not on a subjection of one of these services to another but on healthy competition between them. As we can see from a tragic story of Col.Vytautas Pociūnas or from a shameful story of the adviser of the minister Dainius Dabašinskas, there was no balance between the Ministry and the Department. After choosing the side of the faction and not the state interests in the case of CIA prisons, Vygaudas Ušackas showed that he will not manage to regulate the relationships with the State Security Department.

The publicly announced President’s idea to invite the President of the Federation of Russia to the celebration of March the 11th was the last proof for the Minister. Vygaudas Ušackas who is skilfully griping in the channels of mass media showed that he is not inclined to use these skills as well as the cultivation made by the Ministry in the public sphere for the sake of the state.

Dalia Grybauskaitė has explicitly said that the invitation for the Russian Head of state to join the celebrations of the anniversary of Lithuania’s independence is a diplomatic manoeuvre. Taking into account Kremlin’s answer to our invitation, the President will decide if to take part in the celebrations of the Day of Victory in Moscow on the 9th of May. During twenty years it is one of the most elegant steps in Lithuanian foreign policy. Especially if one remembers what kind of controversy was caused, when, the at that time President Valdas Adamkus encouraged the society to take into consideration a question if the President should go to Moscow or not. This discussion divided the Lithuanian society, poisoned our public sphere and opened a way for Kremlin to blackmail us for several years.

Now Lithuania took over the diplomatic initiative in the relations with Moscow, and this can be considered as no mean achievement for a small state. However, reasoned doubts have arisen if our contemporary diplomatic service will be willing and able to profit from the opened opportunities and if it will understand what kind of changes it is indeed pursued in the foreign policy. The invitation by the President Dalia Grybauskaitė for the President of the Russian Federation not only shows a turn to the East, but also an aim to bring back dignity and efficiency into our foreign policy.

The talented diplomat Vygaudas Ušackas was a creditable Minister of Foreign Affairs. It’s enough to remember the quiet way in which he solved the situation with the Lithuanian sailors kidnapped aside the shores of Africa last summer. The solution of the conflict with Russia on the question of transporters also did not disappoint. It is the media who ruined the Minister. Last April Vygaudas Ušackas simply withstood seemingly unfounded accusations, made by the media due to poor management of the Lithuanian Embassy in London and depletions that were purportedly made there. At that time the critics were put to silence by audit, ordered by the minister. However, the adulation that afterwards started in the media was disastrous.

Not long ago Dalia Grybauskaitė explained, in a nice way, how opinions expressed in the public sphere influence her (I am quoting): „Since I know where, who, for what and who is writing, I check if my decisions are right. In case I clamp on some interest or don’t let to make a good thing for somebody, I immediately see a reaction in one or another media. In this way I can check if my steps are right”.

Finally, it should be reminded that the light spreads in an incredible speed – three hundred thousand kilometres per second. Still, however quick the light is travelling, it is always preceded by darkness.

Gintaras Aleknonis, commentator and host of Public Radio programmes, and Lecture of the Mykolas Romeris University, former employee of the Radio Liberty.  The article was published on Lrt.lt 

A decade ago, when in Prague a decade of the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia was celebrated, the former leader of the Soviet Union tried to convince that one should not reject the attitudes of the other side as well.

I do not believe that somebody, who nineteen years ago has experienced those events in Vilnius, would believe that the other truth also exists. The standard of „two attitudes“ can not pass the reality. Maybe the denial of Holocaust in some Western European countries is considered to be a crime to some purpose. And nobody doubts, that this is not contradicting to the concept of the freedom of speech.

The Lithuanian journalists can be proud of themselves that after the events of the 13th of January only  one side was introduced in our public sphere, that nobody went to work in the television of collaborators (TV set up by Soviets in the in the brutally occupied Lithuanian TV and Radio premises – LTribune), the so-called “What-a vision” ‘Kaspervizija’. Then we understood that a formal hearing of different sides can not be considered as a democracy. Social life is not a scale, on the first plate of which one can put justice, respect for human rights and democratic principles, and on the second – morality and propriety.

The story of the prisons of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that is today continuing in Lithuania is one of those phenomena when two different opinions are tried to be established and the illusion of controversy is tried to be supported. If we would rest upon the principles of honour, we would have to admit regretfully that the secret prisons existed in Lithuania.

One can wonder at the work of the work of the Seimas’ Committee on National Security and Defence. Previous September all the members of this committee were convinced that it is enough to deny a rumour, made by the media. During four months the opinion of these people has changed essentially. One can come to a conclusion that the partners could bring whatever to Lithuania, without any control and to do whatever in a closed sphere, the others being unaware of this. In legal terms, this kind of conclusion is streamlined, anybody can say (and says) that as there’re no evidences, concerning the prisoners, thus, there were no prisons either. However, these kind of statements we can fling around only at home, forgetting the international context as well as the principles of state sovereignty.

Today we have no choice: only after having proved that there were no prisoners, brought to Lithuania, we will believe ourselves that there were no secret prisons. Otherwise nobody in the world will understand, why the mover of the sortie against the twins of New York, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad was taken from the secret prison in Poland to „somewhere“ exactly at that time when the object No.2 was finished to be outfitted in Antaviliai.

Only CIA could prove that there were no prison in Lithuania. However, CIA will not do this. There’s such a kind of a crime in the USA that is defined as impeding justice.

I want to believe that the wave of the so-called justice that arose in Lithuania, i.e. the drive of the denial of the secret prisons, is backed-up by the best patriotic motifs. It is necessary to rescue the honour of the state. However, neither by lying, nor by hiding his head in the sand, one can not rescue the honour. By doing this, we are only poisoning our public sphere that is not very clean.

The possibility that the story of the secret prisons can lead to the revision of Lithuanian political events of several previous years and to a totally alternative estimation of them causes the biggest fear for a lot of people. So far it was very complicated to explain rationally some of the decisions of the President Valdas Adamkus, made during his second cadence. Why did he support “Leo LT”? Why he confused between steadiness and stagnation and supported the government of Gediminas Kirkilas? Why in the case of Vytautas Pociūnas he [President Valdas Adamkus] in as many words  supported the side of the secret services?

When politicians are unified by a common secret, it is hard to expect that only the interests of a nation and state will dictate the decisions. If V.Adamkus would indeed had not known about the secret prisons, today his reaction would for sure be different – he would humanly rebel and would be the first one who would require to investigate the suspicions. A human who had matured in a democratic society, understands that even a bitter truth would better protect state’s honour than a sweet lie would do.

Someone can rejoice over the possibility that the story of the secret prisons will help to retrieve the impeached president Rolandas Paksas. I would have doubts about this. The hand of Jurijus Borisovas will not vanish, however maybe in the process of impeachment we will set eyes on more colours, not only on white and red. And we will remember once again in what a complicated geopolitical space we are living – in a space where only the truth can be an antidote against the games of foreign secret services.

Twenty years ago, when addressing himself to the nation for the first time via TV, the contemporary President of Czechoslovakia* Václav Havel* was reading his text from paper. To him it seemed that it is better to remind an old communist functionary than to trust prompter who is being steered by unknown hands.
———————————————————————————————————————
Gintaras Aleknonis, commentator and host of the Public Radio programmes, Dean and Lecture of the Mykolas Romeris University, former employee of the Radio Liberty.

Translated by Milda Bagdonaitė

Maybe this caution served as an obstacle for the head of the government to say the things that we all should not forget.

First of all, we should take pleasure in the fact, that in the shops or bazaars we are paying in Litas and that the value of Litas is the same as it used to be a year ago. And, if we would take into consideration the purchasing power of Litas, maybe we would find out that today its value is even bigger.

Of course, for those, who just four years ago were loudly dreaming about the Euro introduction and after the failure of these dreams were resenting the European bureaucrats, who told the truth about the perspectives of the Lithuanian economy and prevented the introduction of Euro, the retained honour of the Litas maybe does not seem to be such a big value.

It is necessary not only to have money, but also to guard them. In most countries of the world the economic crisis equalled a word “banker” to a swearword. No single bank did collapse in Lithuania, and Lithuanian government did not have to try to rescue any bank. It is hard to imagine, how much money did we save. The sad prophesies that we will not manage to deal with the situation without the support of International Monetary Fund also did not come true.

In January [2009], the same day, when 18 years ago we were burying the victims of January the 13th, unrest was going on aside the Seimas [Lithuanian Parliament].

Since then we can constantly hear about the danger of social disturbances. One could hardly claim that we avoided these disturbances only because of the fact that the wages and pensions were paid on time. It doesn’t matter that the wages and pensions were smaller than previously.

The political ghosts are still hovering around the buildings of the Parliament. Still, not even 20 years have passed after restoring independence, however, parties, that are proud to be able to call themselves a pro-Russian are already appearing in Lithuania. 20 years ago we could study the lessons of the Russian master of democracy Andrei Sakharov, and today the pro-Russianness is related to Putinism.

What is the most surprising out of the tasks that the current, the 15^th Lithuanian government fulfilled during a year of its existence, it’s the quick and smooth termination of the “Leo LT” story. If we decide to believe in what the guys of “Maxima” claim, not only the firm stance of the negotiators, representing the government, was important, unexpectedly, the complex economical situation turned to be useful for the public interest.  “NDX Energy” immediately needed money, and not the never-ending litigation.

It seems that the happy end of the “affair of the century” saved not less money for the budget, i.e. for all of us, than successful supervision of the banks.

It feels that the optimism for the construction of the new nuclear power plant, that started to arise after the winning of “Leo LT” case, should be treated more offhandedly. First of all one should find out, how the 5 billions Litas, which the European Union appropriated for the shutdown of the old power plant, were used. And only after having done this, we will have a right to complain about the rising prices of electricity.

In the anniversary statement of the Prime Minister nothing was said about emigration, about those thousands of Lithuanian people who are leaving the country. The unrestricted human right of movement, the right to leave for a week, year or a decade is a big value, the right that was introduced by the advent of democracy and freedom. If the current wave of emigration can be considered as our victory or as a loss, we will get to know not earlier than after a decade.

The government of Andrius Kubilius, that is celebrating its first birthday, after many years is the first Lithuanian government which is not afraid to take responsibility. And it’s not really fair that this government has to take responsibility not only for the mistakes of its own, but also for the mistakes that were made before. The talks about the salaries and the cars of the members of the parliament, about the resources assigned for the parliamentary activities -these talks that are inducing big dissatisfaction in the society, should be equally addressed to the position as well the opposition. The most important thing is not to let the essence to be overshadowed by the details.

The lack of responsibility is an ingrained problem in Lithuania. It is not important if the current government will work until the end of its cadence, or it will stay only one year, one month more; it just would be nice to believe that the subsequent cabinets of the ministers will have to guide their activities taking into consideration the principles of responsibility for their words and deeds.

Andrius Kubilius and his government became a handy target for the media which considers itself as a watchdog. It becomes somehow filthy to say publicly a good word about the government. One forgets that a good watchdog barks only then, when there’s a real threat. And nobody calls an incessantly barking dog as a watchdog.

20 ago the “Velvet revolution” decorated the streets of Chechoslovakia with posters with an image of Vaclav Havel and an inscription: “Truth and love will overcome lie and hatred”. After V.Havel became a president, the aforementioned phrase, said by him, remained as a motto for the lifes of many people.

Only two years have passed. A hack murderer who was for the first time tried in free Chechoslovakia told to the psychologist: “It’s just funny to hear that truth and love will overcome lie and hatred. Business and bargains are the most important things. Supply and demand”.

*Translated by Milda Bagdonaitė

The Austrians, normally used to a calm life, questioned, if it wouldn’t be worth to take into consideration the possibilities of strengthening security or even maybe closing the border. However, later it turned out that previously in this town two houses were robbed per year, and now this number increased up to three…

Worldwide this kind of “political arithmetic” sounds ridiculous, however, in our country it became an inseparable part of social life, and the more it goes, the more it seems that the aim of this arithmetic is not to help people understand the things, but to trick them intentionally.

A case in point could be the recent increase of the popularity of the speaker of the Seimas, Mrs. Irena Degutienė. We can congratulate this politician, as during one moth her popularity increased from 1 to 13 per cent. At the same time it is possible to announce (as it was actually done), that her popularity increased 13 times…

I don’t know why we are so unwilling to count, or we just don’t know how to count. A word “price” is almost absent in Lithuanian political dictionary. The politicians are in a hurry to phrase about their “good works”, at the same time willingly forgetting that each step, taken by the state, has is price, and that it is necessary to be able to count this price. And this ability to count is by no means less important than political will.

Every law, submitted to the Seimas, is analyzed and checked if it’s not contradicting to the Constitution and the legal acts of the EU. However, even after carrying out this kind of analysis, we can hear different kind of stories. And about the price of the implementation of the laws we get to hear rarely. While making decisions this should become a crucial argument.

Let’s recall the story of the secret CIA prisons in Lithuania that lasted for sure too long. If these prisons really existed, their construction and maintenance was for sure not expensive. However, after the suspicions were announced, the burden of the price for real or the assumed torturing of the prisoners in Lithuania became almost unbearable. And as log as we haven’t got a clear answer, the burden of the interest rate is increasing every day.

The problem of the double citizenship could be taken into account as another example. How much this would cost for Lithuania? It is possible to think about optimistic as well as pessimistic scenarios…

In case if the possibility of double citizenship will be introduced, we will have to pay for the social security, medical treatment of those our citizens who spent their whole lives abroad and pay taxes to the budgets of other countries. We would also have to pay for the education of their children… I agree though that we cannot evaluate everything in terms of money. No price could be attributed to love, happiness and freedom – the things that are the most important for a human being. They have a price though. And if we would try to find out what this price is, the decisions would obtain a different weight and meaning.

This could be called as pragmatism, the lack of which is very well seen during the electoral campaigns, when promises are abundant and when nobody talks about the costs of the implementation of these promises. Let’s not forget that the process of governing the state in most cases is similar to the solution of the equation, a solution of which necessarily has to be zero, i.e., when somebody gets something extra, somebody has to deprive of something at the same time.

When political arithmetic is pushed out of the public sphere, it becomes easier to try to get rid of responsibility. And today we should express our joy that our President Mrs. Dalia Grybauskaitė who during the first hundred days of her term managed to smoothly enter Lithuanian political life, still during her electoral campaign managed to demonstrate us, how a strict and just word can come over the sweet promises. And now, after having raised the level of political culture till the heights, that are not conceivable to many politicians or columnists, the President tries to reveal the meaning of responsibility as well.

I have in mind, for example, the decision of the head of state not to appoint Mr. Valteris Baliukonis as an ambassador in Spain. Some political columnists named this as a fact of ignoring rules, the others – as a female caprice. I would say, that by disapproving to this candidature the President showed that a signature is more than a spot of ink on the paper, that is shows our decisiveness and readiness to take responsibility.

One should not sign if he or she disapproves to something. It’s always easiest to hide oneself behind the shoulders of the others, while letting them to sign and thus to get rid of responsibility. This is an old soviet tradition. If it wouldn’t be so deeply ingrained into our consciousness, maybe the prosecutors, that were putting their signatures if the Kaunas’ paedophilia cases, would have behaved differently.

When recalling his soviet experiences, Alexander Solzhenicyn said: “In those time, when in front of the system one was helpless, the only one way to retain the feelings of a human being, was to follow the principle: “Let it be, but I will not do this by my own hands!”

______________________________________________________________

Gintaras Aleknonis, commentator and host of the Public Radio programmes, Dean and Lecture of the Mykolas Romeris University, former employee of the Radio Liberty.

Translated by Milda Bagdonaitė

Although it’s still not clear what will be the end of the story, which started in Kaunas last Monday (5 October) by two murders, however, it’s already possible to say that the suspect Drąsius Kedys can become a national legend. Maybe he’s already a legend. After less than 48 hours have passed after the murders, in a social network “Facebook” it was already more than 500 admirers of Drasius Kedys.

This number was quite much bigger than the number of the respecters of the present member of the European Parliament Leonidas Donskis, who for several months was successfully canvassing for votes in the Internet space. The page of Drasius Kedys is decorated by the colours of Lithuanian flag (yellow, green and red), on it as on a background one can see a rigorous face and a lettering “My Justice”. The number of Drasius Kedys’ admirers is increasing so quickly that one question arises naturally: who right now, when you are reading this commentary, has more followers – Drasius Kedys or the most popular politician of our country. The “Facebook” club of the President of the Republic of Lithuania Dalia Grybauskaitė has above 5000 admirers.

It would be possible to state that all the countries of the world have their own levellers. The nations need them especially in hard times, when the belief in justice and government is faltering. Thus the unexpected rise of Drasius Kedys’ popularity should be seen as a very serious warning to all our authorities. It is a reminder for the legislators and the implementers of the law, that are currently cutting salaries and pensions, about how important it is to cherish the solidarity feeling as well as to have in mind that the patience of ordinary people is limited and that overstepping these limits sometimes can cause very painful outcomes.

However, first of all, this tragedy that happened in Kaunas, harshly hit our whole law and order. And this can be said not only because of the fact that it was a judge who was murdered during this tragedy. It is totally unclear if there’s any system of self-control operating in Lithuania. The independence of a judge is ensured by the legal immunity, provided to him. It should not be seen as a privilege, it is judge’s duty that is hard to fulfil, as a accusation, that is addressed to a single judge, becomes an accusation to all the judges, as long as this accusation is not disproved.

A vital instinct of the judiciary should be an aim to clear their files from those who compromised themselves and not an aim to protect the honour of judge’s mantle at any price. The judge, who was killed in Kaunas, became a victim not only of that person, who shot at him. How today should feel those who neither confirmed nor persuasively confuted the accusations?

However it would be, the Kaunas tragedy most severely hit the so-called “fourth government”. Unexpectedly came to light a fact that the instinct of chasing sensations that overtook our media for quite long time ago, has nothing to do with humanity. In the screen the justice has to be implemented immediately and within touch. Since Monday we can observe that the difference between a criminal serial and newscast has already almost vanished.

It becomes more and more clearly visible that our media that is trying on the mantle of an omniscient judge still lives in two-decades-old recollection about a glory of its own. At that time almost 70 percent of the inhabitants of Lithuania had trust in press which indeed often used to play a role of “the last instance”, to become almost the only one place, where the miserable could expect to get justice.

During the two last decades the trust in media in Lithuania was decreasing bit by bit, two times it dropped by approximately one fifth – during the presidential impeachment and after the scandal of State Security Department that arose after the death of Col. Vytautas Pociūnas (The Lithuanian State Security Department officer who died in mysterious circumstances in Gardin, Belarus – LTribune) . Even though the trust in media rose after both of these crises, however, it did not return to the original heights.

Could it happen that the futile Drasius Kedys’ appeals to the media, his belief that the media will hear out him, will become an evidence to the majority, that the press, radio and TV, that is permanently explosively demonstrating its independence, already disgorged to the hated layer of government?

At the end I would like to recall one more sad story. When two years ago two small boys disappeared in the district of Kelmė, the media immediately labelled their mother Alma Jonaitienė as a holly martyr (It was discovered soon that Jonaitienė murdered her two sons – LTribune). As long as the search proceeded, the rivers of tears were pouring out of TV screens, and the newspapers’ pages were overloaded by the details of the public confession. And after the truth was revealed, the media revenged fiercely.

It is hard to get rid of an impression that the journalists were revenging to A.Jonaitienė for the vanity of their own. The woman was judged not only in the law court, but also in newspapers’ pages, in the screen. I am not going to defend the murderer; however, I can not avoid mentioning that the question, why the mother hauled her hand off her sons, remains unanswered.

As long as all the questions that arose during the tragedy of Kaunas, will not get honest answers, the team of the admirers of Drasius Kedys will increase inexorably and not only in Internet space.

—————————————————————————————————————————-
This commentary was presented on the Lithuanian Public radio and published on the Lithuanian Public Broadcaster’s Internet site on 8 October.  The commentary is published by courtesy of Mr Gintaras Aleknonis.

Gintaras Aleknonis, commentator and host of the Public Radio programmes, Dean and Lecture of the Mykolas Romeris University, former employee of the Radio Liberty.

The text translated by Milda Bagdonaitė