Iredentinis diskursas Tarybų Lietuvos spaudoje 1941–1945 metais: nuo teritorinių pretenzijų iki „lietuviškų žemių sujungimo“

Abstract

Based on the Soviet Lithuanian periodical press of 1941–1945, the article analyzes the expression of territorial claims of the Soviet Lithuanian leadership from the beginning of the war between Germany and the Soviet Union until the restoration of Soviet Lithuania in 1945. The article explains when and how the Lithuanian irredentism was actualized and how its form evolved. The irredentist discourse of Soviet Lithuania is analyzed in the light of the circumstances of the restoration and territorial transformation of Soviet Lithuania at the end of World War II. In fact, in 1944–1945, new Soviet Lithuania was created, which included Vilnius and Klaipėda. Therefore, the article focuses on the “traditionally” dominant territories on the western side of the Lithuanian lands, namely, Klaipėda region and another part of East Prussia beyond the Nemunas River. Keywords: World War II, Soviet Lithuania, Lithuanian SSR, East Prussia, Klaipėda region, irredentism, irredentist discourse. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15823/istorija.2017.21 Summary From the appearance of Lithuanian irredentism at the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the war between Germany and the Soviet Union in 1941, the expression of Lithuanian irredentism depended on the geopolitical position of the major neighboring states. It had an influence on the expression of Lithuanian irredentism even when Lithuania was independent and it had Klaipėda region as a constituent part, and also when Lithuania was a part of the Soviet Union. During World War II Lithuanian irredentism was actualized as an element of Soviet politics that should have consolidated Lithuanians against Germans in the Soviet Union war with Germany. As the Red Army started the “liberation” of Lithuania, the leadership of Soviet Lithuania declared an objective to “liberate” not only the territory of Soviet Lithuania, but also Klaipėda region as well as another part of East Prussia beyond the Nemunas River. Soviet Lithuanian leaders borrowed the ideological conception of “liberation of Lithuanian lands” and their “consolidation” into one Soviet Lithuania from the history of Russia. The Soviet Lithuanian leadership presented itself as the executor of a historical mission – the only power that is capable of and must “liberate” all “Lithuanian lands invaded” by Germans and incorporate them into the territorial composition of Soviet Lithuania, which was being restored. From the “liberation” of Vilnius to Klaipėda “liberation” it was not clear what the territorial boundaries of Soviet Lithuania were going to be, and therefore the meaning of the “liberation of Soviet Lithuania” was separated into abstract “liberation” of “Lithuanian lands”. The problem of the international recognition of Soviet Lithuanian “statehood” being in the composition of the Soviet Union and the politics of the Soviet Union towards Soviet republics had a certain influence on the expression of territorial claims of the Soviet Lithuanian leadership in the irredentist discourse. From the beginning of the war between Germany and the Soviet Union until the Tehran Conference at the end of 1943 the Soviet Lithuanian leadership did not express any territorial claims to irredentist territories. They were openly named only from 1944, and the claims were directed not only towards Klaipėda region but also another part of the East Prussian territory beyond the Nemunas River. The claims of the Soviet Lithuanian leadership to irredentist territories were not an independent phenomenon; they reflected the position of the USSR leaders. After the entry of the Red Army into the territory of Soviet Lithuania occupied by Germans the myth of “complete liberation of Soviet Lithuania” started to form, which had to confirm the fact that the territorial borders of Lithuania had always existed since the end of World War II. However, until the occupation of Klaipėda the Lithuanian society as well as the leadership of Soviet Lithuania conceived Soviet Lithuania as the whole of “Lithuanian lands” and hoped that not only Vilnius and Klaipėda regions but also a part of the East Prussian territory beyond the Nemunas River would be annexed to Lithuania. After the 3rd session of the Lithuanian SSR Supreme Council two “liberation” discourses were actualized: one of “Soviet Lithuania” and the other of “Lithuanian lands”. Official attitude of both the USSR and Soviet Lithuanian leaders towards the subject of the position of the Soviet Union borders according to the position of 1941 did not contradict the coexistence of such discourses: “liberation of Soviet Lithuania” meant the “liberation” of the borders of the Soviet Lithuanian territory of 1940–1941, while “the liberation of Lithuanian lands” meant the claims of the Soviet Lithuanian leadership to Klaipėda region. After the “liberation” of the territory of Soviet Lithuania the Soviet Lithuanian leadership did not place any claims to another part of the East Prussian territory beyond the Nemunas River, while the claims to Klaipėda region were expressed in a concealed form. While explaining the reasons of the change in the expression of the claim of the Soviet Lithuanian leadership to irredentist territories, two objective factors can be separated: the change of attitude of the USSR leadership regarding the dependence of the part of the East Prussian territory beyond the Nemunas River and allied agreements on territorial issues. The change of attitude of the USSR leaders could be related to the evacuation of inhabitants in Klaipėda region and another part of the East Prussian territory beyond the Nemunas River. The analysis of the official statements of the Soviet Lithuanian leaders shows that after the occupation of Klaipėda such discourses as “liberation of Soviet Lithuania” and “liberation of Lithuanian lands” transformed into the discourse of “complete liberation of Soviet Lithuania”, which meant “consolidation of Lithuanian lands”. The change of irredentist discourse was complicated, because the Soviet Lithuanian leadership treated Stalin’s order concerning the “liberation” of Klaipėda and “complete liberation of Soviet Lithuania” as the return of Klaipėda to Soviet Lithuania and the “consolidation of Lithuanian lands” in its constitution. The emphasis of the “consolidation of Lithuanian lands” with Vilnius and Klaipėda had to create a positive opinion of the Lithuanian society and a favourable attitude towards Soviet government. The analysis of the rhetoric of the Soviet Lithuanian leadership, legislation and the sessions of the USSR and the Lithuanian SSR Supreme Council of 1945 allows us to state that after the occupation of Klaipėda “the consolidation of Lithuanian lands” was not an objective reality.