Lithuania's entry into the USSR. Soviet “occupation” of the Baltic states in facts and figures

July 21-22 marks the next 72nd anniversary of the formation of the Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian SSR. And the fact of this kind of education, as is known, causes a huge amount of controversy. Since the moment Vilnius, Riga and Tallinn became the capitals of independent states in the early 90s, debates have not ceased on the territory of these same states about what actually happened in the Baltic states in 1939-40: peaceful and voluntary entry part of the USSR, or was it still Soviet aggression, which resulted in a 50-year occupation.

Riga. The Soviet Army enters Latvia

The words that the Soviet authorities in 1939 agreed with the authorities of Nazi Germany (the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) that the Baltic states should become Soviet territory have been circulating in the Baltic states for several years now and often allow certain forces to celebrate their victory in the elections. The Soviet “occupation” theme seems to have been worn out to nothing, however, turning to historical documents, one can understand that the theme of occupation is a big soap bubble, which is brought to enormous proportions by certain forces. But, as you know, any, even the most beautiful soap bubble, will sooner or later burst, spraying the person blowing it with small cold drops.

So, Baltic political scientists who adhere to the view that the annexation of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia to the USSR in 1940 is considered an occupation, declare that if it were not for the Soviet troops that entered the Baltic states, then these states would have remained not only independent, but also declared their neutrality. It is difficult to call such an opinion anything other than a deep misconception. Neither Lithuania, nor Latvia, nor Estonia simply could afford to declare neutrality during the Second World War as, for example, Switzerland did, because the Baltic states clearly did not have the financial instruments that Swiss banks possessed. Moreover, the economic indicators of the Baltic states in 1938-1939 show that their authorities had no opportunity to dispose of their sovereignty as they pleased. Let's give a few examples.

Welcoming Soviet ships in Riga

The volume of industrial production in Latvia in 1938 was no more than 56.5% of the production volume in 1913, when Latvia was part of the Russian Empire. The percentage of the illiterate population of the Baltic states by 1940 is shocking. This percentage was about 31% of the population. More than 30% of children aged 6-11 did not attend school, but instead were forced to work in agricultural work in order to participate, so to speak, in the economic support of the family. During the period from 1930 to 1940, in Latvia alone, over 4,700 peasant farms were closed due to the colossal debts into which their “independent” owners were driven. Another eloquent figure for the “development” of the Baltic states during the period of independence (1918-1940) is the number of workers employed in the construction of factories and, as they would now say, housing stock. This number by 1930 in Latvia amounted to 815 people... Dozens of multi-storey buildings and factories and factories stretching out into the horizon, which were erected by these tireless 815 builders, appear before your eyes...

And given such and such economic indicators of the Baltic states by 1940, someone sincerely believes that these countries could dictate their terms to Nazi Germany, declaring that it would leave them alone because of their declared neutrality.
If we consider the aspect that Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were going to remain independent after July 1940, then we can cite data from a document that is not uninteresting for supporters of the “Soviet occupation” idea. July 16, 1941 Adolf Hitler holds a meeting about the future of the three Baltic republics. As a result, a decision was made: instead of 3 independent states (which Baltic nationalists are trying to trumpet today), to create a territorial entity that is part of Nazi Germany, called Ostland. Riga was chosen as the administrative center of this entity. At the same time, a document was approved on the official language of the Ostland - German (this refers to the question that the German “liberators” would allow the three republics to develop along the path of independence and authenticity). On the territory of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, higher educational institutions were to be closed, and only vocational schools were allowed to remain. German policy towards the population of the Ostland is described in an eloquent memorandum by the Minister for the Eastern Territories of the Third Reich. This memorandum, remarkably, was adopted on April 2, 1941 - before the creation of Ostland itself. The memorandum contains words that the majority of the population of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia is not suitable for Germanization, and therefore must be resettled in Eastern Siberia. In June 1943, when Hitler still harbored illusions about the successful completion of the war against the Soviet Union, a directive was adopted that the Ostland lands would become the fiefdoms of those military personnel who had especially distinguished themselves on the Eastern Front. At the same time, the owners of these lands from among the Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians should either be resettled to other areas or used as cheap labor for their new masters. A principle that was used back in the Middle Ages, when knights received lands in conquered territories along with the former owners of these lands.

After reading such documents, one can only guess where the current Baltic ultra-rightists got the idea that Hitler’s Germany would give their countries independence.

The next argument of supporters of the idea of “Soviet occupation” of the Baltic states is that, they say, the entry of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia into the Soviet Union set these countries back several decades in their socio-economic development. And it’s difficult to call these words anything other than a delusion. During the period from 1940 to 1960, more than two dozen large industrial enterprises were built in Latvia alone, which has never happened here in its entire history. By 1965, industrial production volumes on average in the Baltic republics had increased more than 15 times compared to the 1939 level. According to Western economic studies, the level of Soviet investment in Latvia by the early 1980s amounted to about 35 billion US dollars. If we translate all this into the language of percentages, it turns out that direct investments from Moscow amounted to almost 900% of the amount of goods produced by Latvia itself for the needs of both its domestic economy and the needs of the union economy. This is how occupation is, when the “occupiers” themselves hand out huge amounts of money to those they “occupy.” Perhaps, many countries could only dream of such an occupation even today. Greece would love for Mrs. Merkel, with her billions of dollars in investments, to “occupy” it, as they say, until the second coming of the Savior to Earth.

The Seimas of Latvia welcomes the demonstrators

Another “occupation” argument: referendums on the accession of the Baltic states to the USSR were held illegitimately. They say that the communists specifically put forward only their lists, and the people of the Baltic states voted for them almost unanimously under pressure. However, if so, then it becomes completely incomprehensible why tens of thousands of people on the streets of the Baltic cities joyfully greeted the news that their republics were becoming part of the Soviet Union. The wild joy of Estonian parliamentarians when, in July 1940, they learned that Estonia had become the new Soviet Republic is completely incomprehensible. And if the Baltic states really did not want to come under Moscow’s protectorate, then it is also unclear why the authorities of the three countries did not follow the Finnish example and showed Moscow the real Baltic fig.

In general, the epic with the “Soviet occupation” of the Baltic states, which interested parties continue to write, is very similar to one of the sections of the book called “Untrue Tales of the Peoples of the World.”

Riga. The Soviet Army enters Latvia

Welcoming Soviet ships in Riga

After reading such documents, one can only guess where the current Baltic ultra-rightists got the idea that Hitler’s Germany would give their countries independence.

The Seimas of Latvia welcomes the demonstrators

In the period between the two world wars, the Baltic states became the object of the struggle of the great European powers (England, France and Germany) for influence in the region. In the first decade after Germany's defeat in World War I, there was a strong Anglo-French influence in the Baltic states, which was subsequently hampered by the growing influence of neighboring Germany in the early 1930s. The Soviet leadership, in turn, tried to resist it, taking into account the strategic importance of the region. By the end of the 1930s. Germany and the USSR actually became the main rivals in the struggle for influence in the Baltic states.

Failure "Eastern Pact" was caused by differences in the interests of the contracting parties. Thus, the Anglo-French missions received detailed secret instructions from their general staffs, which defined the goals and nature of the negotiations - a note from the French general staff said, in particular, that along with a number of political benefits that England and France would receive in connection with the accession of the USSR, this would allow it to be drawn into the conflict: “it is not in our interests for it to remain outside the conflict, keeping its forces intact.” The Soviet Union, which considered at least two Baltic republics - Estonia and Latvia - as a sphere of its national interests, defended this position in the negotiations, but did not meet with understanding from its partners. As for the governments of the Baltic states themselves, they preferred guarantees from Germany, with which they were bound by a system of economic agreements and non-aggression treaties. According to Churchill, “The obstacle to the conclusion of such an agreement (with the USSR) was the horror that these very border states experienced of Soviet help in the form of Soviet armies that could pass through their territories to protect them from the Germans and incidentally include them in the Soviet-communist system. After all, they were the most vehement opponents of this system. Poland, Romania, Finland and the three Baltic states did not know what they feared more - German aggression or Russian salvation." .

Simultaneously with negotiations with Great Britain and France, the Soviet Union in the summer of 1939 intensified steps towards rapprochement with Germany. The result of this policy was the signing of a non-aggression treaty between Germany and the USSR on August 23, 1939. According to the secret additional protocols to the treaty, Estonia, Latvia, Finland and eastern Poland were included in the Soviet sphere of interests, Lithuania and western Poland - in the German sphere of interests); by the time the treaty was signed, the Klaipeda (Memel) region of Lithuania was already occupied by Germany (March 1939).

1939. The beginning of the war in Europe

Mutual Assistance Pacts and Treaty of Friendship and Borders

Independent Baltic states on the map of the Small Soviet Encyclopedia. April 1940

As a result of the actual division of Polish territory between Germany and the USSR, the Soviet borders moved far to the west, and the USSR began to border on the third Baltic state - Lithuania. Initially, Germany intended to turn Lithuania into its protectorate, but on September 25, during Soviet-German contacts on resolving the Polish problem, the USSR proposed to begin negotiations on Germany’s renunciation of claims to Lithuania in exchange for the territories of the Warsaw and Lublin voivodeships. On this day, the German Ambassador to the USSR, Count Schulenburg, sent a telegram to the German Foreign Ministry, in which he said that he had been summoned to the Kremlin, where Stalin pointed out this proposal as a subject for future negotiations and added that if Germany agreed, “the Soviet Union would immediately will take on the solution of the problem of the Baltic states in accordance with the protocol of August 23.”

The situation in the Baltic states themselves was alarming and contradictory. Against the background of rumors about the impending Soviet-German division of the Baltic states, which were refuted by diplomats of both sides, part of the ruling circles of the Baltic states was ready to continue rapprochement with Germany, many were anti-German and counted on the USSR’s help in maintaining the balance of power in the region and national independence, while Leftist forces operating underground were ready to support joining the USSR.

Meanwhile, on the Soviet border with Estonia and Latvia, a Soviet military group was created, which included the forces of the 8th Army (Kingisepp direction, Leningrad Military District), 7th Army (Pskov direction, Kalinin Military District) and the 3rd Army (Belarusian Front).

In conditions when Latvia and Finland refused to provide support to Estonia, England and France (who were at war with Germany) were unable to provide it, and Germany recommended accepting the Soviet proposal, the Estonian government entered into negotiations in Moscow, which resulted in September 28 A Mutual Assistance Pact was concluded, providing for the creation of Soviet military bases on the territory of Estonia and the deployment of a Soviet contingent of up to 25 thousand people on them. On the same day, the Soviet-German Treaty “On Friendship and Border” was signed, fixing the division of Poland. According to the secret protocol to it, the conditions for the division of spheres of influence were revised: Lithuania moved into the sphere of influence of the USSR in exchange for Polish lands east of the Vistula, which went to Germany. At the end of negotiations with the Estonian delegation, Stalin told Selter: “The Estonian government acted wisely and for the benefit of the Estonian people by concluding an agreement with the Soviet Union. It could work out with you like with Poland. Poland was a great power. Where is Poland now?

On October 5, the USSR invited Finland to also consider the possibility of concluding a mutual assistance pact with the USSR. Negotiations began on October 11, but Finland rejected the USSR's proposals both for a pact and for the lease and exchange of territories, which led to the Maynila Incident, which became the reason for the USSR's denunciation of the non-aggression pact with Finland and the Soviet-Finnish War of 1939-1940.

Almost immediately after the signing of mutual assistance agreements, negotiations began on the basing of Soviet troops in the Baltic states.

The fact that the Russian armies were to stand on this line was absolutely necessary for the security of Russia against the Nazi threat. Be that as it may, this line exists, and an Eastern Front has been created, which Nazi Germany will not dare attack. When Mr. Ribbentrop was called to Moscow last week, he had to learn and accept the fact that the implementation of Nazi plans in relation to the Baltic countries and Ukraine must be completely stopped.

Original text(English)

That the Russian armies should stand on this line was clearly necessary for the safety of Russia against the Nazi menace. At any rate, the line is there, and an Eastern front has been created which Nazi Germany does not dare assail. When Herr von Ribbentrop was summoned to Moscow last week it was to learn the fact, and to accept the fact, that the Nazi designs upon the Baltic States and upon the Ukraine must come to a dead stop.

The Soviet leadership also stated that the Baltic countries did not comply with the signed agreements and were pursuing anti-Soviet policies. For example, the political union between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (the Baltic Entente) was characterized as having an anti-Soviet orientation and violating mutual assistance treaties with the USSR.

A limited contingent of the Red Army (for example, in Latvia it numbered 20,000) was introduced with the permission of the presidents of the Baltic countries, and agreements were concluded. Thus, on November 5, 1939, the Riga newspaper “Newspaper for Everyone” published a message in the article “Soviet troops went to their bases”:

On the basis of a friendly agreement concluded between Latvia and the USSR on mutual assistance, the first echelons of Soviet troops passed through the Zilupe border station on October 29, 1939. To welcome the Soviet troops, a guard of honor with a military band was formed...

A little later, in the same newspaper on November 26, 1939, in the article “Freedom and Independence”, dedicated to the celebrations of November 18, the President of Latvia published a speech by President Kārlis Ulmanis, in which he stated:

...The recently concluded mutual assistance treaty with the Soviet Union strengthens the security of our and its borders...

Ultimatums of the summer of 1940 and the removal of the Baltic governments

Entry of the Baltic states into the USSR

The new governments lifted bans on communist parties and demonstrations and called early parliamentary elections. In the elections held on July 14 in all three states, the pro-communist Blocs (Unions) of the working people won - the only electoral lists admitted to the elections. According to official data, in Estonia the turnout was 84.1%, with 92.8% of the votes cast for the Union of Working People, in Lithuania the turnout was 95.51%, of which 99.19% voted for the Union of Working People, in Latvia the turnout was 94.8%, 97.8% of the votes were cast for the Working People's Bloc. The elections in Latvia, according to information from V. Mangulis, were falsified.

The newly elected parliaments already on July 21-22 proclaimed the creation of the Estonian SSR, Latvian SSR and Lithuanian SSR and adopted the Declaration of Entry into the USSR. On August 3-6, 1940, in accordance with the decisions of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, these republics were admitted to the Soviet Union. From the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian armies, the Lithuanian (29th Infantry), Latvian (24th Infantry) and Estonian (22nd Infantry) territorial corps were formed, which became part of the PribOVO.

The entry of the Baltic states into the USSR was not recognized by the USA, the Vatican and a number of other countries. Recognized him de jure Sweden, Spain, Netherlands, Australia, India, Iran, New Zealand, Finland, de facto- Great Britain and a number of other countries. In exile (in the USA, Great Britain, etc.), some diplomatic missions of the pre-war Baltic states continued to operate; after World War II, the Estonian government in exile was created.

Consequences

The annexation of the Baltic states with the USSR delayed the emergence of the Baltic states allied to the Third Reich, planned by Hitler

After the Baltic states joined the USSR, the socialist economic transformations already completed in the rest of the country and repressions against the intelligentsia, clergy, former politicians, officers, and wealthy peasants moved here. In 1941, “due to the presence in the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian SSR of a significant number of former members of various counter-revolutionary nationalist parties, former police officers, gendarmes, landowners, factory owners, large officials of the former state apparatus of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and other persons leading subversive anti-Soviet work and used by foreign intelligence services for espionage purposes,” deportations of the population were carried out. . A significant part of those repressed were Russians living in the Baltic states, mainly white emigrants.

In the Baltic republics, just before the start of the war, an operation was completed to evict the “unreliable and counter-revolutionary element” - just over 10 thousand people were expelled from Estonia, about 17.5 thousand from Lithuania, from Latvia - according to various estimates from 15.4 to 16.5 thousands of people. This operation was completed by June 21, 1941.

In the summer of 1941, after Germany’s attack on the USSR, in Lithuania and Latvia in the first days of the German offensive, there were speeches by the “fifth column”, which resulted in the proclamation of short-lived “loyal to Greater Germany” states, in Estonia, where Soviet troops defended longer, this process almost immediately was replaced by inclusion in the Reichskommissariat Ostland like the other two.

Modern politics

Differences in assessment of the events of 1940 and the subsequent history of the Baltic countries within the USSR are a source of unrelenting tension in relations between Russia and the Baltic states. In Latvia and Estonia, many issues regarding the legal status of Russian-speaking residents - migrants of the 1940-1991 era - have not yet been resolved. and their descendants (see Non-citizens (Latvia) and Non-citizens (Estonia)), since only citizens of the pre-war Latvian and Estonian Republics and their descendants were recognized as citizens of these states (in Estonia, citizens of the ESSR also supported the independence of the Republic of Estonia in the referendum on March 3, 1991) , the rest were deprived of civil rights, which created a unique situation for modern Europe, the existence of discrimination regimes on its territory. .

European Union bodies and commissions have repeatedly addressed Latvia and Estonia with official recommendations, which indicated the inadmissibility of continuing the legal practice of segregation of non-citizens.

The fact that law enforcement agencies of the Baltic states initiated criminal cases against former employees of the Soviet state security agencies living here, accused of participating in repressions and crimes against the local population during World War II, received a special public response in Russia. The illegality of these accusations was confirmed in the international Strasbourg court

Opinion of historians and political scientists

Some foreign historians and political scientists, as well as some modern Russian researchers, characterize this process as the occupation and annexation of independent states by the Soviet Union, carried out gradually, as a result of a series of military-diplomatic and economic steps and against the backdrop of the Second World War unfolding in Europe. In this regard, the term is sometimes used in journalism Soviet occupation of the Baltic states, reflecting this point of view. Modern politicians also talk about incorporation, as a softer version of joining. According to the former head of the Latvian Foreign Ministry Janis Jurkans, “The American-Baltic Charter contains the word incorporation". Baltic historians emphasize the facts of violation of democratic norms during the holding of early parliamentary elections, held at the same time in all three states in the conditions of a significant Soviet military presence, as well as the fact that in the elections held on July 14 and 15, 1940, it was allowed only one list of candidates nominated by the “Bloc of Working People”, and all other alternative lists were rejected. Baltic sources believe that the election results were falsified and did not reflect the will of the people. For example, the text posted on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Latvia provides information that “ In Moscow, the Soviet news agency TASS gave information about the mentioned election results twelve hours before the start of vote counting in Latvia". He also cites the opinion of Dietrich André Loeber - one of the former soldiers of the Abwehr sabotage and reconnaissance unit Brandenburg 800 in 1941-1945 - that the annexation of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania was fundamentally illegal: since it is based on intervention and occupation. . From this it is concluded that the decisions of the Baltic parliaments to join the USSR were predetermined in advance.

Soviet, as well as some modern Russian historians, insist on the voluntary nature of the entry of the Baltic states into the USSR, arguing that it received final formalization in the summer of 1940 on the basis of decisions of the highest legislative bodies of these countries, which received the broadest voter support in the elections for the entire existence of independent Baltic states. Some researchers, while not calling the events voluntary, do not agree with their qualification as occupation. The Russian Foreign Ministry considers the accession of the Baltic states to the USSR as consistent with the norms of international law of that time.

Otto Latsis, a famous scientist and publicist, stated in an interview with Radio Liberty - Free Europe in May 2005:

Took place incorporation Latvia, but not occupation"

Notes

Semiryaga M.I.. - Secrets of Stalin's diplomacy. 1939-1941. - Chapter VI: Troubled Summer, M.: Higher School, 1992. - 303 p. - Circulation 50,000 copies.
Guryanov A. E. The scale of deportation of the population deep into the USSR in May-June 1941, memo.ru
Michael Keating, John McGarry Minority nationalism and the changing international order. - Oxford University Press, 2001. - P. 343. - 366 p. - ISBN 0199242143
Jeff Chinn, Robert John Kaiser Russians as the new minority: ethnicity and nationalism in the Soviet successor states. - Westview Press, 1996. - P. 93. - 308 p. - ISBN 0813322480
Great Historical Encyclopedia: For schoolchildren and students, page 602: "Molotov"
Treaty between Germany and the USSR
http://www.historycommission.ee/temp/pdf/conclusions_ru_1940-1941.pdf 1940-1941, Conclusions // Estonian International Commission for Investigation of Crimes Against Humanity]
http://www.am.gov.lv/en/latvia/history/occupation-aspects/
http://www.mfa.gov.lv/en/policy/4641/4661/4671/?print=on
- “Resolution regarding the Baltic States adopted by the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe” September 29, 1960
- Resolution 1455 (2005) "Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Russian Federation" June 22, 2005
(English) European Parliament (January 13, 1983). "Resolution on the situation in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania." Official Journal of the European Communities C 42/78.
(English) European Parliament resolution on the sixtieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Europe on May 8, 1945
(English) European Parliament resolution of 24 May 2007 on Estonia
Russian Foreign Ministry: The West recognized the Baltic states as part of the USSR
Archive of foreign policy of the USSR. The Case of the Anglo-French-Soviet Negotiations, 1939 (vol. III), l. 32 - 33. quoted from:
Archive of foreign policy of the USSR. The Case of the Anglo-French-Soviet Negotiations, 1939 (vol. III), l. 240. quoted from: Military literature: Research: Zhilin P. A. How Nazi Germany prepared an attack on the Soviet Union
Winston Churchill. Memoirs
Meltyukhov Mikhail Ivanovich. Stalin's missed chance. The Soviet Union and the struggle for Europe: 1939-1941
Telegram No. 442 of September 25 from Schulenburg to the German Foreign Ministry // Subject to announcement: USSR - Germany. 1939-1941: Documents and materials. Comp. Yu. Felshtinsky. M.: Moscow. worker, 1991.
Mutual assistance pact between the USSR and the Republic of Estonia // Plenipotentiary representatives report... - M., International Relations, 1990 - pp. 62-64
Mutual assistance pact between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Republic of Latvia // Plenipotentiary representatives report... - M., International Relations, 1990 - pp. 84-87
Agreement on the transfer to the Lithuanian Republic of the city of Vilna and the Vilna region and on mutual assistance between the Soviet Union and Lithuania // Plenipotentiary representatives report ... - M., International Relations, 1990 - pp. 92-98

Original taken from nord_ursus in The Black Myth of the “Soviet Occupation” of the Baltic States

As is known, the current Baltic countries - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, whose fate in the 20th century was almost the same - currently adhere to the same historiographical policy regarding this period. The Baltic states count their de jure independence not from 1991, when they separated from the USSR, but from 1918, when they gained independence for the first time. The Soviet period - from 1940 to 1991 - is interpreted as nothing other than the Soviet occupation, during which there was also a “softer” German occupation from 1941 to 1944. The events of 1991 are interpreted as the restoration of independence. At first glance, everything is logical and obvious, but upon detailed study one can come to the conclusion that this concept is untenable.

In order to make the essence of the problem under consideration more clear, it is necessary to provide the background and circumstances of the formation of statehood of all three countries in 1918.

The independence of Latvia was proclaimed on November 18, 1918 in Riga, occupied by German troops, the independence of Estonia on February 24, 1918, and that of Lithuania on February 16, 1918. In all three countries, after this, there were civil wars for two years, or, in the tradition of the Baltic countries themselves, wars of independence. Each of the wars ended with the signing of an agreement with Soviet Russia, according to which it recognized the independence of all three countries and established a border with them. The agreement with Estonia was signed in Tartu on February 2, 1920, with Latvia in Riga on August 11, 1920, and with Lithuania in Moscow on July 12, 1920. Later, after Poland annexed the Vilna region, the USSR continued to consider it the territory of Lithuania.

Now about the events of 1939-1940.

To begin with, we should mention a document that modern Baltic historiography directly connects with the annexation of the Baltic states to the USSR, although it is only indirectly related to it. This is a non-aggression pact between the USSR and Nazi Germany, signed by People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR V. M. Molotov and German Foreign Minister I. Ribbentrop in Moscow on August 23, 1939. The treaty is also known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Nowadays, it is customary to condemn not so much the pact itself as the secret protocol attached to it on the division of spheres of influence. According to this protocol, Finland, Estonia, Latvia and the eastern territories of Poland (Western Belarus and Western Ukraine) moved into the sphere of influence of the USSR; later, when the Treaty of Friendship and Border was signed on September 28, 1939, Lithuania also moved into the sphere of influence of the USSR.

Does this mean that the USSR has already planned to include the Baltic states into its composition? Firstly, neither the agreement itself nor the secret protocol contains anything out of the ordinary; this was a common practice of those years. Secondly, the clauses of the secret protocol that mention the division of spheres of influence only mention the following:

In the event of a territorial and political reorganization of the regions that are part of the Baltic states (Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania), the northern border of Lithuania is simultaneously the border of the spheres of interest of Germany and the USSR. At the same time, the interests of Lithuania in relation to the Vilna region are recognized by both parties.

As we can see, there is no clause raising the question of the potential inclusion of territories of the Soviet sphere of influence into the USSR. At the same time, let us turn to another similar precedent - the division of spheres of influence in Europe between the USSR and Great Britain after the Second World War. As you know, for almost 50 years the sphere of influence of the USSR included the states of Eastern Europe - Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. However, the USSR did not seek to include them in its composition; moreover, it refused to admit Bulgaria to the Union. Consequently, the accession of the Baltic states to the USSR has nothing to do with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

But what influenced this decision of the Soviet government? This was influenced by the strong pro-German orientation of the authorities of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and, as a consequence, the potential threat of these countries turning into an outpost of Nazi Germany as a result of the voluntary admission by the authorities of these countries of German troops to their territory, in connection with which the Germans could attack not from Brest , as it happened on June 22, 1941, and from near Narva, Daugavpils, Vilnius. The border with Estonia passed 120 km from Leningrad, and there was a real threat of the fall of Leningrad in the first days of the war. I will give some facts that substantiate the fears of the Soviet leadership.

On March 19, 1939, Germany presented Lithuania with an ultimatum demanding the transfer of the Klaipeda region. Lithuania agrees, and on March 22 an agreement is signed on the transfer of the city of Klaipeda (Memel) and the surrounding territory to Germany. According to the text of an internal memorandum from the chief of the German Foreign News Service Dertinger dated June 8, 1939, Estonia and Latvia agreed to coordinate with Germany all defensive measures against the USSR - in accordance with secret articles from the non-aggression treaties between the Baltic countries and Germany. In addition, the “Directive on the unified preparation of the armed forces for the war of 1939-1940,” approved by Hitler, stated the following: The position of the limitrophe states will be determined solely by the military needs of Germany. “As events develop, it may become necessary to occupy the limitrophe states up to the border of old Courland and incorporate these territories into the empire» .

On April 20, 1939, in Berlin, the chief of staff of the Latvian army M. Hartmanis and the commander of the Kurzeme division O. Dankers, as well as the chief of the Estonian General Staff, Lieutenant General N. Reek, were present at the celebrations marking the 50th anniversary of Adolf Hitler. In addition, in the summer of 1939, the head of the General Staff of the German Ground Forces, Lieutenant General Franz Halder, and the head of the Abwehr, Admiral Wilhelm Franz Canaris, visited Estonia.

In addition, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have been members of an anti-Soviet and pro-German military alliance called the Baltic Entente since 1934.

In order to prevent the appearance of German troops in the Baltic states, the USSR first temporarily seeks from Germany to renounce its claims to these territories, and then seeks to station its troops there. A month after the signing of the Non-Aggression Treaty, the Soviet Union consistently concluded mutual assistance agreements with the Baltic countries. The agreement with Estonia was concluded on September 28, 1939, with Latvia on October 5, and with Lithuania on October 10. On the Soviet side, they were signed by Molotov, on the Baltic republics side - by their foreign ministers: Karl Selter (Estonia), Wilhelms Munters (Latvia) and Juozas Urbshis (Lithuania). According to the terms of these treaties, states were obliged to “to provide each other with all possible assistance, including military assistance, in the event of a direct attack or threat of attack from any great European power.” The military assistance that the USSR provided to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania consisted of supplying the armies of these countries with weapons and ammunition, as well as stationing a limited contingent of Soviet troops on their territory (20-25 thousand people for each country). This situation was mutually beneficial - the USSR could secure both its borders and the borders of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. According to the agreement with Lithuania, the USSR also transferred the Vilna region to Lithuania, as the former territory of Poland (as mentioned above, the USSR recognized it as the territory of Lithuania occupied by Poland), occupied by Soviet troops in September during the Polish operation. It is worth mentioning that when signing the agreements, the Soviet side exerted certain diplomatic pressure on the ministers of the Baltic countries. However, firstly, if we proceed from the realities of time, this is logical, because when a world war begins, any reasonable politician will act harshly towards unreliable neighbors, and secondly, even the fact of pressure that has taken place does not negate the legality of the signed agreements .

The deployment of a limited contingent of Soviet troops on the territory of neighboring states with the consent of their governments, albeit as a result of diplomatic pressure, does not contradict the norms of international law. It follows from this that, from a legal point of view, the entry of the Baltic republics into the USSR is not a consequence of the entry of Soviet troops into their territory. In accordance with this, it can be argued that the Soviet government has no plans for the Sovietization of the Baltic states. Any attempts to prove the existence of such plans among the Soviet leadership, as a rule, come down to lengthy discussions about the “imperial essence” of Russia and the USSR. Of course, I cannot exclude the possibility of Stalin’s intentions to annex the Baltic states to the USSR, however, it is impossible to prove their existence. But there is evidence to the contrary. Stalin's words from a private conversation with the General Secretary of the Executive Committee of the Comintern Georgiy Dimitrov: “We think that in the mutual assistance pacts (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) we have found the form that will allow us to bring a number of countries into the orbit of influence of the Soviet Union. But for this you need to endure - strictly observe their internal regime and independence. We will not seek their Sovietization".

However, in the spring of 1940 the situation changed. Supporters of the thesis about the “Soviet occupation” of the Baltic states prefer to take events in the Baltic states out of their historical context and not consider what was happening in Europe at that time. And the following happened: on April 9, 1940, Nazi Germany occupied Denmark with lightning speed and without resistance, after which within 10 days it established control over most of Norway. On May 10, the troops of the Third Reich occupy Luxembourg, after 5 days of military operation the Netherlands capitulate, and on May 17 Belgium surrenders. Within a month, France came under German control. In this regard, the Soviet government expresses fears about the possibility of Germany quickly opening an eastern front, that is, an attack on the Baltic countries, and then, through their territory, on the USSR. The contingent of Soviet troops located in the Baltic states at that time was not enough to successfully confront the Wehrmacht. In the fall of 1939, when Soviet military bases were located in the Baltic countries, the USSR leadership did not count on such a turn of events. To fulfill the terms of the Mutual Assistance Treaties concluded in the fall of 1939, it was necessary to introduce an additional contingent of troops into the territory of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which would be able to resist the Wehrmacht, and, accordingly, thus provide assistance to the Baltic countries, which was provided for in the treaties. At the same time, the pro-German orientation of the authorities of these states continued, which essentially could be considered as non-compliance by these states with mutual assistance treaties. These states did not leave the Baltic Entente. In addition, Latvia and Estonia during the Soviet-Finnish War provided assistance to the Finnish army by intercepting Soviet radio signals (despite the fact that the RKKF ships participating in hostilities against Finland sailed into the Gulf of Finland from a naval base near the city of Paldiski in Estonia ). In connection with the above circumstances, the Soviet Union is taking rather tough, but completely justified actions towards its Baltic neighbors. On June 14, 1940, the USSR presented a note to Lithuania, in which it demanded, in the form of an ultimatum, to form within 10 hours a government friendly to the USSR, which would implement the Mutual Assistance Treaty and organize free passage of additional contingents of Soviet armed forces into the territory of Lithuania. The Lithuanian government agrees, and on June 15 additional Soviet units enter Lithuania. On June 16, similar demands were presented to Estonia and Latvia. Consent was also received, and on June 17, Soviet troops entered these countries. It was the introduction of additional troops in June 1940 that is considered to be the beginning of the “Soviet occupation.” However, the actions of the Soviet Union are absolutely legal, since they correspond to the provision written in mutual assistance treaties, according to which countries “undertake to provide each other with all possible assistance, including military assistance, in the event of a direct attack or threat of attack by any great European power”. In June 1940, the threat of attack increased greatly, which meant that the troops assigned to assist in the event of a potential threat had to be increased accordingly! This circumstance justifies the actions of the Soviet government in sending ultimatums. As for whether these actions were an occupation (a number of politicians use the concept of “armed aggression” or even “attack”), the governments of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, although not entirely voluntary, gave consent to the deployment of additional troops. In this case, they had a choice - they could not accept the ultimatums and offer resistance to the Red Army. Or they might not even provide it - in this case, it would still have turned out that the Red Army entered their territory without consent. Then we could still talk about the Soviet occupation. But it turned out differently. Troops were admitted with official consent. Consequently, there can be no talk of occupation.

Before the deployment of troops, additional agreements were concluded between the USSR and the Baltic countries, in which the procedure for the entry and location of Soviet military units was determined, and officers of the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian armies participated in the coordination of troops. On June 17 at 22:00, President of Latvia Karlis Ulmanis addressed the people of Latvia by radio, where he announced that the entry of Soviet troops was taking place "with the knowledge and consent of the government, which follows from the friendly relations between Latvia and the Soviet Union". Acting President of Lithuania Antanas Merkys similarly notified Lithuanians.

Proponents of the opposite point of view prefer to draw a parallel here with the German occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. The scheme is the same: on the evening of March 14, 1939, Hitler presented the President of Czechoslovakia Emil Hacha with an ultimatum demanding that he sign an act on the liquidation of the independence of Czechoslovakia by 6 a.m. on March 15. At the same time, Hakha was confronted with a fact: at night, German troops would cross the border with Czechoslovakia. The president was under pressure and threatened with execution if he refused. Reich Minister of Aviation Hermann Goering threatened to wipe Prague off the face of the earth with carpet bombing. Four hours later, Emil Gakha signed the agreement. BUT!.. Firstly, the ultimatum was presented when the German troops had already received the order to cross the border, and the Soviet troops did not receive the order until a response to the ultimatum followed. Secondly, when Gakha signed the agreement, German troops had already crossed the border. The difference, I think, is obvious.

The population of the Baltic states, whose pro-Soviet sentiments were extremely strong, greeted the Soviet troops with jubilation. These sentiments, thanks to the events that took place, intensified; rallies for joining the USSR were held in a number of cities. Modern Baltic politicians who falsify history prefer to claim that these demonstrations were allegedly organized and financed by the “occupiers,” and that the population as a whole allegedly resisted.

Demonstrations in Kaunas, Riga and Tallinn. July 1940

On July 14-15, 1940, early parliamentary elections were held in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. According to their results, the candidates of the "Unions of Working People" received: in Estonia - 93% of the votes, in Latvia - 98%, in Lithuania - 99%. The elected new parliaments transformed Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania into Soviet socialist republics on July 21, and on July 22 signed declarations of accession to the USSR, which were reviewed and approved by the Soviet Union on August 6.

Here, supporters of the concept of occupation draw a parallel with the occupation (Anschluss) of Austria in March 1938. They say that a plebiscite was held there in exactly the same way, and the majority of the population voted for reunification with Germany, but this does not cancel the fact of occupation. But meanwhile, they do not take into account the significant difference that German troops entered Austria on March 12, 1938 without any consent of the government of this country, and the plebiscite, in which 99.75% voted for the Anschluss (German. Anschlüß- reunion), was held on April 10. Thus, the plebiscite can be considered illegitimate, since it was held at a time when the occupation of Austria by German troops had already been carried out. The fundamental difference from the Soviet troops already stationed in the Baltic states is that the governments of the Baltic countries gave their consent to their deployment, even after diplomatic pressure. Moreover, according to the instructions for Soviet troops in the Baltic states, contacts of the Red Army soldiers with the population were limited, and they were strictly prohibited from supporting any third-party political forces. It follows from this that the Soviet troops present on the territory of these three countries could not influence the political situation. But the mere fact of their presence does not change anything. After all, using the same standard, one can call into question the legal status of the pre-war Baltic states, since they were proclaimed in the presence of the troops of the Kaiser's Germany.

In short, the USSR government never planned to include the Baltic states into the USSR. The plan was only to include it in the Soviet orbit of influence and make the Baltic states allies of the USSR in a future war. In October 1939, the Soviet leadership considered it sufficient to station Soviet troops there so that German troops would not be stationed there later, or rather, so that if German troops invaded there, they would have to fight them there. And in June 1940 it was necessary to take more serious measures - to increase the number of troops and force the authorities of these countries to change their political course. With this, the Soviet government completed its task. The new governments of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have already completely voluntarily signed declarations of joining the USSR, with the existing support for the pro-Soviet course by the majority of the population.

Supporters of the occupation thesis often try to prove the opposite by the presence of war plans with Estonia and Latvia already in the summer of 1939 and the fact of the concentration of Soviet troops near the border, sometimes citing the Estonian phrasebook for interrogating prisoners of war as an argument. Yes, there really were such plans. There was a similar plan for the war with Finland. But, firstly, the goal was not to implement these plans, the plans themselves were developed in case it was not possible to resolve the situation peacefully (as happened in Finland), and secondly, the military action plans were not aimed at joining the Baltic states to USSR, and to replace the political course there by military occupation - if this plan had come true, then, of course, one could talk about Soviet occupation.

Of course, the actions of the USSR in June 1940 were very harsh, and the actions of the authorities of the Baltic countries were not entirely voluntary. But, firstly, this does not cancel the legality of the entry of troops, and secondly, in the legal status of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in the period from 1940 to 1991, they could not de jure be in a state of occupation, since even after the entry of troops into in these states their legitimate authority continued to operate. The personnel of the government was changed, but the power itself did not change; talk that the “people's governments” were puppets and were carried out on Red Army bayonets is nothing more than a historical myth. These same legitimate governments made decisions to join the USSR. A mandatory sign by which a territory can have the legal status of occupied is the power brought by the bayonets of the occupying army. In the Baltic states there was no such power, but legitimate governments continued to operate. But in the same Czechoslovakia, this scheme took place - on March 15, 1939, when German troops crossed the German-Czechoslovak border, the territory of the Czech Republic (Slovakia became an independent state) by Hitler’s personal decree was declared a German protectorate (Bohemia and Moravia), that is Germany declared its sovereignty over this territory. The Reich Protectorate became the occupation power of the Czech Republic brought by the German army. Formally, Emil Haha still continued to be the current president, but was subordinate to the Reich Protector. The difference with the Baltic states is again obvious.

So, the concept of Soviet occupation is based on the fact that there was diplomatic pressure from the Soviet Union. But, firstly, this was not the only case of the use of diplomatic pressure, and secondly, it does not cancel the legality of the actions taken. The governments of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, both in October 1939 and June 1940, themselves allowed Soviet troops to be stationed on the territories of their countries, and already in July 1940, the new legally elected governments voluntarily decided to join the USSR. Consequently, there was no Soviet occupation of the Baltic countries in 1940.

Moreover, it did not exist in 1944, when the Baltic republics were already the territory of the USSR, and Soviet troops liberated them from Nazi occupation.

In addition, modern Baltic historiography mentions repressions against the inhabitants of the newly formed Baltic Soviet republics and, in particular, their deportation to Siberia on June 14, 1941. The greatest lie in this historiography lies, firstly, in the inflated figures, traditional in relation to Stalinist repressions, and secondly, in the allegations of the alleged genocide of Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians. In reality, in May 1941, the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR issued a decree "On measures to cleanse the Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian SSRs from anti-Soviet, criminal and socially dangerous elements." Of all the Baltic republics combined, about 30 thousand people were deported. Considering that the population of all three republics at that time was about 3 million, the number of deportees is approximately 1%. Moreover, it should be taken into account that although there were, of course, innocent people among those deported, far from the full number and not even the majority of those deported were “anti-Soviet elements”; among them there were also commonplace criminals who, even before 1940, were kept in prisons of the independent Baltic states, and in 1941 were simply transferred to other places. In addition, it should be taken into account that the deportation was carried out immediately before the war (8 days before its start) and was carried out to prevent cooperation of “anti-Soviet, criminal and socially dangerous elements” with the enemy during a possible Nazi occupation of the territory. The deportation of one percent of the population, among whom, moreover, there were many ethnic Russians (since there were many Russians in the pre-war Baltic states), can only be called a genocide of the Baltic peoples if one has an overly rich imagination. The same, however, applies to larger-scale deportations carried out in 1949, when about 20 thousand people were taken from each republic. Predominantly those who were deported were those who “distinguished themselves” during the war by direct collaboration with the Nazis.

Another common misconception regarding the Baltic states is that during the Great Patriotic War, the majority of the Baltic states collaborated with the Germans, and the majority of residents of the Baltic cities greeted the Germans with flowers. In principle, we cannot judge how large a number of people were happy about the arrival of the “German liberators,” but the fact that on the streets of Vilnius, Riga and other cities there were people joyfully greeting them and throwing flowers does not mean that they were the majority. Moreover, there were no fewer people who greeted the Red Army just as joyfully in 1944. There are, however, other facts. During the years of Nazi occupation, on the territory of the Baltic republics, as well as on the territory of the occupied Belarusian SSR, there was a partisan movement numbering about 20 thousand people in each republic. There were also Baltic divisions of the Red Army: the 8th Infantry Estonian Tallinn Corps, the 130th Infantry Latvian Order of Suvorov Corps, the 16th Infantry Lithuanian Klaipeda Red Banner Division and other formations. During the war, 20,042 members of Estonian formations, 17,368 participants of Latvian formations and 13,764 participants of Lithuanian military formations were awarded military orders and medals.

Already against the background of the above facts, the assertion about the predominance of sentiments of cooperation with the Nazis among the Baltic states becomes untenable. The movements of the Baltic “forest brothers,” which existed until the end of the 1950s, were not so much national as they were criminal in nature, naturally diluted with nationalism. And it was often peaceful residents of the Baltic republics, and more often of Baltic nationalities, who died at the hands of the forest brothers.

In addition, the Baltic republics within the USSR in no way occupied the position of occupied ones. They were governed by national authorities consisting of Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians; citizens of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania automatically received Soviet citizenship in August 1940, and the armies of these states became part of the Red Army. Throughout the Soviet period, the population of the Baltic peoples increased and their national culture developed. In addition, the Baltic republics occupied a privileged position in the “Evil Empire”. Huge investments were made in the economy and tourism sector (Jurmala and Palanga were considered one of the best resorts in the entire Union). In particular, for a ruble of their own funds, the Baltic republics received approximately 2 rubles at the expense of the RSFSR. The Latvian SSR with a population of 2.5 million people received almost 3 times more funds from the budget than the Voronezh region with the same population. In the villages of the RSFSR, per 10 thousand hectares of arable land there were an average of 12.5 km of paved roads, and in the Baltic states - almost 70 km, and the Vilnius-Kaunas-Klaipeda highway was considered the best road in the Soviet Union.In Central Russia, per 100 hectares of agricultural land, the cost of fixed production assets was 142 thousand rubles, and in the Baltics - 255 thousand rubles. It was the Baltic republics and, to a slightly lesser extent, the Moldavian and Georgian SSRs that had the highest standard of living in the entire Soviet Union. It must be said that in the 1990s, a huge number of factories in the Baltic countries were closed and destroyed (in Russia, of course, too, but this is a separate conversation) under the pretext that “we don’t need Soviet monsters.” The oil shale processing plant in Kohtla-Järve, the machine-building plant in Pärnu (partially functioning) came under the knife, most of the buildings of the Riga Carriage Works were closed(Rīgas Vagonbūves Rūpnīca), which supplied electric trains and trams to the entire Soviet Union, the Riga Electrical Engineering Plant VEF (Valsts Elektrotehniskā Fabrika), built before the revolution and significantly expanded during the Soviet years, is in decline; the Riga Bus Factory collapsed in 1998 and has not yet been restored. RAF (Rīgas Autobusu Fabrika); Other infrastructure facilities also suffered, for example, a sanatorium built in Soviet times in Jurmala was abandoned.

In addition, there is another interesting circumstance that makes the concept of “restoring independence” untenable. Namely, the independence of Lithuania - on March 11, 1990, Estonia - on August 20, 1991, and Latvia - on August 21, 1991 - was proclaimed respectively by the parliaments of the Lithuanian, Estonian and Latvian SSR. From the point of view of the existing concept, these parliaments were local bodies of occupation power. If this is so, then the legal status of the current Baltic states can be questioned. It turns out that indirectly the current Baltic authorities call themselves occupiers in the recent past, and directly they deny any legal continuity from the Soviet republics.

Thus, we can conclude that the concept of “Soviet occupation” of the Baltic states is artificial and far-fetched. At the moment, this concept is a convenient political tool in the hands of the authorities of the Baltic countries, where mass discrimination of the Russian population is carried out on this basis. In addition, it is also a tool for issuing large invoices to Russia with compensation demands. In addition, Estonia and Latvia demand (now unofficially) from Russia the return of part of the territories: Estonia - Zanarovye with the city of Ivangorod, as well as the Pechora district of the Pskov region with the city of Pechory and the ancient Russian city, and now the rural settlement of Izborsk, Latvia - Pytalovsky district of the Pskov region areas. As justification, the borders under the 1920 treaties are cited, although they are not currently in force, since they were denounced in 1940 by the declaration of joining the USSR, and the border changes were carried out already in 1944, when Estonia and Latvia were republics of the Soviet Union.

Conclusion: the concept of “Soviet occupation” of the Baltic states has little in common with historical science, but is, as stated above, just a political tool.

In June 1940, events began that were previously called “the voluntary entry of the Baltic peoples into the USSR”, and since the late 1980s they have increasingly been called the “Soviet occupation of the Baltic countries.” During the years of Gorbachev’s “perestroika”, a new historical scheme began to be introduced.

Meanwhile, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia by the summer of 1940 were by no means democratic. And for a long time. As for their independence, it has been rather elusive since its announcement in 1918.

1. The myth of democracy in the interwar Baltic states

At first, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were parliamentary republics. But not for long.

Internal processes, first of all, the growing influence of left-wing forces that sought to “do it like in Soviet Russia,” led to a reciprocal consolidation of the right. However, this short period of parliamentary democracy was also marked by repressive policies at the top. Thus, after an unsuccessful uprising staged by the communists in Estonia in 1924, more than 400 people were executed there. For small Estonia this is a significant figure.

On December 17, 1926, in Lithuania, the parties of nationalists and Christian Democrats, relying on groups of officers loyal to them, carried out a coup d'etat. The putschists were inspired by the example of neighboring Poland, where the founder of the state, Josef Pilsudski, had established his sole power earlier that year. The Lithuanian Seimas was dissolved. The state was headed by Antanas Smetona, a nationalist leader who was the first president of Lithuania. In 1928, he was officially proclaimed “leader of the nation,” and unlimited powers were concentrated in his hands. In 1936, all parties in Lithuania, except the Nationalist Party, were banned.

The Estonian parliament has not met for four years. All this time, the republic was ruled by a junta consisting of Päts, Commander-in-Chief J. Laidoner and the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs K. Eerenpalu. All political parties were banned in March 1935, except for the pro-government Union of the Fatherland.

The Constitutional Assembly, which had no alternative elections, adopted a new constitution for Estonia in 1937, which granted extensive powers to the president. In accordance with it, a one-party parliament and President Päts were elected in 1938.

One of the “innovations” of “democratic” Estonia was “camps for idlers,” as the unemployed were called. A 12-hour working day was established for them, and those who were guilty were beaten with rods.

On May 15, 1934, Latvian Prime Minister Kārlis Ulmanis carried out a coup d'etat, abolished the constitution and dissolved the Seimas. President Kviesis was given the opportunity to serve until the end of his term (in 1936) - in fact, he no longer decided anything. Ulmanis, who was the first prime minister of independent Latvia, was proclaimed “the leader and father of the nation.” More than 2,000 oppositionists were arrested (however, almost all were soon released - Ulmanis’s regime turned out to be “soft” compared to its neighbors). All political parties were banned.

In the right-wing authoritarian regimes of the Baltic states, some differences can be identified. So, if Smetona and Päts largely relied on a single authorized party, then Ulmanis relied on a formally non-party state apparatus plus a developed civil militia (aiszargov). But they had more in common, to the point that all three dictators were people who were at the head of these republics at the very dawn of their existence.

Thus, long before 1940, the last signs of democratic freedoms were eliminated throughout the Baltic states and a totalitarian state system was established.

The Soviet Union only had to make a technical replacement of the fascist dictators, their pocket parties and political police with the mechanism of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the NKVD.

2. The myth of the independence of the Baltic countries

The independence of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia was proclaimed in 1917-1918. in a difficult environment. Most of their territory was occupied by German troops. Kaiser Germany had its own plans for Lithuania and the Baltic region (Latvia and Estonia). From the Lithuanian Tariba (national Council), the German administration forced an “act” of calling the Württemberg prince to the Lithuanian royal throne. In the rest of the Baltics, a Baltic Duchy was proclaimed, headed by a member of the Ducal House of Mecklenburg.

In 1918-1920

The Baltic states, with the help of first Germany and then England, became a springboard for the deployment of forces in the internal Russian civil war. Therefore, the leadership of Soviet Russia took all measures to neutralize them.

Initially, the Baltic countries were oriented towards England and France, but after the Nazis came to power in Germany, the ruling Baltic cliques began to move closer to the strengthening Germany.

The culmination of everything was the mutual assistance agreements concluded by all three Baltic states with the Third Reich in the mid-1930s (“Score of the Second World War.” M.: “Veche”, 2009). Under these treaties, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were obliged to seek help from Germany if their borders were threatened. The latter had in this case the right to send troops into the territory of the Baltic republics. Likewise, Germany could “legally” occupy these countries if a “threat” to the Reich arose from their territory. Thus, the “voluntary” entry of the Baltic states into the sphere of interests and influence of Germany was formalized.

This circumstance was taken into account by the leadership of the USSR in the events of 1938-1939. A conflict between the USSR and Germany under these conditions would have entailed the immediate occupation of the Baltic states by the Wehrmacht.

Therefore, during the negotiations on August 22-23, 1939 in Moscow, the issue of the Baltic states was one of the most important. It was important for the Soviet Union to protect itself from any surprises on this side. The two powers agreed to draw the border of their spheres of influence so that Estonia and Latvia fell into the Soviet sphere, Lithuania into the German sphere.

The consequence of the agreement was the approval by the leadership of Lithuania on September 20, 1939 of a draft agreement with Germany, according to which Lithuania was “voluntarily” transferred to the protectorate of the Third Reich. However, already on September 28, the USSR and Germany agreed to change the boundaries of their spheres of influence. In exchange for the strip of Poland between the Vistula and the Bug, the USSR received Lithuania.

In the fall of 1939, the Baltic countries had an alternative - to find themselves under Soviet or German protectorate. History did not provide them with anything third at that moment.

The support of anti-Soviet forces by the interventionists and the inability of Soviet Russia to provide sufficient assistance to its supporters in the Baltic states led to the retreat of the Red Army from the region. Red Latvians, Estonians and Lithuanians, by the will of fate, found themselves deprived of their homeland and scattered throughout the USSR. Thus, in the 1920-30s, that part of the Baltic peoples who most actively advocated for Soviet power found themselves in forced emigration. This circumstance could not but affect the mood in the Baltic states, deprived of the “passionate” part of its population.

Due to the fact that the course of the civil war in the Baltic states was determined not so much by internal processes as by changes in the balance of external forces, it is absolutely impossible to establish exactly who was there in 1918-1920. there were more supporters of Soviet power or supporters of bourgeois statehood.

Soviet historiography attached great importance to the growth of protest sentiments in the Baltic states at the end of 1939 - the first half of the 1940s. They were interpreted as the maturation of socialist revolutions in these republics. It was understood that the local underground communist parties were at the head of the workers' actions. Nowadays, many historians, especially Baltic ones, tend to deny facts of this kind. It is believed that protests against dictatorial regimes were isolated, and dissatisfaction with them did not automatically mean sympathy for the Soviet Union and the communists.

However, given the previous history of the Baltic states, the active role of the working class of this region in the Russian revolutions of the early twentieth century, and widespread dissatisfaction with dictatorial regimes, it should be recognized that the Soviet Union had a strong “fifth column” there. And it clearly consisted not only of communists and sympathizers. The important thing was that the only real alternative to joining the USSR at that time, as we saw, was joining the German Reich. During the civil war, the hatred of Estonians and Latvians towards their centuries-old oppressors - the German landowners - became quite clearly evident. Thanks to the Soviet Union, Lithuania returned its ancient capital, Vilnius, in the fall of 1939.

So, sympathy for the USSR among a significant part of the Baltic states at that time was determined not only and not so much by left-wing political views.

On June 14, 1940, the USSR presented an ultimatum to Lithuania, demanding a change of government to one consisting of individuals more loyal to the Soviet Union and permission to send additional contingents of Soviet troops to Lithuania, stationed there under the mutual assistance agreement concluded in the fall of 1939. Smetona insisted on resistance, but the entire cabinet of ministers opposed. Smetona was forced to flee to Germany (from where he soon moved to the United States), and the Lithuanian government accepted Soviet conditions.

On June 15, additional Red Army contingents entered Lithuania.

The presentation of similar ultimatums to Latvia and Estonia on June 16, 1940 did not meet with objections from the dictators there. Initially, Ulmanis and Päts formally remained in power and sanctioned measures to create new authorities in these republics. On June 17, 1940, additional Soviet troops entered Estonia and Latvia.

In all three republics, governments were formed from people friendly to the USSR, but not communists. All this was carried out in compliance with the formal requirements of the current constitutions.

Then parliamentary elections took place. The decrees on new appointments and elections bore the signatures of the Prime Minister of Lithuania and the presidents of Latvia and Estonia.

But at the same time, the threat of destroying the statehood of the three Baltic republics was averted. What would have happened to it if the Baltic states had fallen under the control of the German Reich was demonstrated in 1941-1944.

In the Nazi plans, the Balts were subject to partial assimilation by the Germans and partial eviction to lands cleared of Russians. There was no talk of any Lithuanian, Latvian or Estonian statehood.

Under the conditions of the Soviet Union, the Balts retained their statehood, their languages as official, developed and enriched their national culture.