As people started to build an independent Lithuania, they likewise set out to lithuanianize her. The process of lithuanianization did not escape its excesses – attacks against foreign citizens. It was not only the Holly See delegate A.Zecchini who voiced great indignation in his reports to Vatican, but also President Antanas Smetona, who never approved of attacks against Jews and Poles.
***
In the beginning of 1923, non-Lithuanian signs and plates in Kaunas and across the entire country would get an occasional tarring. People would find notes of proclamation glued to walls of their houses, signed by “patriots” and fascist groups that came to be called “smearers” (murzintojai).
While the smearers' actions were being hotly debated in the press, Augustinas Voldemaras (Prime Minister at the time) denounced the tarring of signs, stressing that “every Lithuanian passing through these tarred signs must lower his eyes in shame” and that it gave the country great dishonor abroad. Gradually, nationalistic attacks against Jews (they were being accused of distrusting the recently-introduced national currency, litas, and of demanding privileges) and the smearers' adventures lost momentum.
In regimes run by one man, the latter's personal attitude to racial and national minorities becomes a significant factor in state politics.
In regimes run by one man, the latter's personal attitude to racial and national minorities becomes a significant factor in state politics; therefore, Smetona's policies in Lithuania say much about him as a person. Authoritarian regimes (and such was Lithuania under Smetona 1926-1940) usually oppress their national minorities, turning a blind eye on their needs. The more radical among Smetona's opponents have repeatedly called him “King of Jews,” thus voicing their discontent with the President's tolerant position regarding Jews, Lithuania's most important and populous national minority at the time. But what about local Poles? What policies did Smetona's regime adopt regarding national minorities?
On March 24, 1936, Smetona gave probably the most comprehensive account of his views on Vilnius question (Lithuania's old capital was at the time under Polish rule, tensing relations between the two neighboring countries) and Lithuanian-Polish relations in a lecture called “The Lithuanian Nation and Its Purpose.” The importance of Vilnius he described thus: “Lithuania without Vilnius is missing one wing in her flight upwards, to the future. It is a moderate position: In want of a third of her land, she cannot have a full plan of her tasks, she does not have the importance in the eyes of her neighbors that she could have. Getting it back would add weight on international plane and internal life would be more spacious, management work would be done more purposefully.”
Poles, according to Smetona, must, too, grant Lithuanians their right to self-determination, must renounce their imperial nationalism, since the Lithuanian-Pole type that once had historical existence, was no longer possible. In the olden days, Poles would call conscious Lithuanians “litvomans,” unfaithfull to the common Polish-Lithuanian cause, but today, when Lithuania was free, they quit doing so, yet still sought to maintain the obsolete origine lituanus, natione polonus type and grant it the right to determine Lithuania's lot.
The late Marshall Pilsudski loved throwing the term around whenever it suited him, like in Paris in 1927, yet this dual national type became shaky with the rise of the Lithuanian nation. Even families would break up because of it: “Professor Ivanauskas of our university, nobleman, Lithuanian from Lyda in origin, had one brother who thought himself Belorussian and another – Polish. A whole lot of our noblemen – Biržiškai, Mongirdai, Landbergiai, Pečkauskaitė, Pšibiliauskienė, Putvinskiai and many more – come from families whose fathers or grandfathers regarded themselves as Lithuanian Poles.
Finally, late Narutavičius from Telšiai, a nobleman of Polish nurturing, was a member of the Council of Lithuania and signed the declaration of independent Lithuania. And his real brother, Narutavičius, champion of Pilsudski, was elected Poland's President. Polonized Lithuanians, who support Poland, would like to see the common folk that are still nationally unconscious to follow their suit; those recalling their Lithuanian origin stand in support of the resurgent Lithuania.”
That is why Poland allegedly cries about how Lithuanians persecute Poles and, in return, persecute Lithuanians of Vilnius. “Do we not have Polish gymnasiums and other Polish schools, founded on our common laws? We do, so the Poles are not being wronged, but they seek to have more rights than is their due, in order to influence the resurgent Lithuanian people. After all, these schools are meant for the polonized Lithuanians, not some newcomers from Poland. We seek national revival of our people, while Poles think it's their right to use them as ethnographic material. We would be happy if Poles allowed Lithuanians of Vilnius region to remain Lithuanians. This is where our views clash. Today, language is the most important mark ofr a nation, but not the only one.”
Smetona specified his views even further in LTS assembly of November 1939, probably in an attempt to curb his own radical supporters from the younger generation: “To persecute foreigners is not only dishonorable, it is unwise. The flood of nationalistic currents will have to go on the ebb. Life will make nations break free of a narrow shell of nationalism, look for contacts in culture instead of differences and return to a universal human basis of morality.”
In November 1939, Lithuania got Vilnius back, but – contrary to what was being said – Smetona was not excited about it for several reasons. Garrisons of the Red Army were stationed there and, besides, by its population Vilnius was – even though quite Jewish – predominantly Polish, with Polish language dominating the city. Old myths – that the denationalized Lithuanians of Vilnius region were waiting for mother Lithuania to come, whereby they'd burst into speaking publicly in their native tongue – appeared to be mere fables, while Poles with resolutely Polish identity met the coming of Lithuanians – the new invaders, as they saw it – to Vilnius with hostility.
Vilnius was a prism to reflect on spiritual capacities of the Lithuanian nation – it was being claimed that the existence of the Lithuanian state depended on national resistivity, yet the question arose – how far should the nationalism go. V.Alantas (Jakševičius) raised a point that nationality should not be considered as something extreme, one should not feared to become nationalist in the true sense of the word. He was critical of Lithuanians' hospitality and welcoming nature, as it was harmful to Lithuania's interests.
The authorities organized language courses, forcing people to drill Lithuanian and all its rules into their heads, without quite understanding them.
The government undertook vigorous lithuanianization of the city, replaced public signs, published all information in Lithuanian, speaking and writing in Lithuanian became institutional requirement – all of a sudden, the city turned foreign to majority of its townspeople.
The authorities organized language courses, forcing people to drill Lithuanian and all its rules into their heads, without quite understanding them. The present author, newcomer from Žemaitija (Western Lithuania), used to rent a room in Žvėrynas, Vytautas street, with a landlord of Belorussian descent, R.I.P Valentinas Syvijus, who, having experienced the intensity of the pre-war language courses, would wake up from sleep or after ten pints of beer (his absolute limit) and, as late as 1974, would reel off in Lithuanian with a heavy Slavonic accent: “Daiktavardiiis yra kalbos daliis, kurį galima pamacyci yr apačioci.” (Noun is part of speech that you can see and touch.”) He still spoke the language poorly, even though his entire family – who came from Molėtai, on the Lithuanian side of the demarcation line – used only Lithuanian.
Historian Š.Liekis came up with an example to show how much the Lithuanian military, who entered Vilnius, were taken aback by the real, not nominal, linguistic situation in the city.
Lieutenant Mikalauskas of the Lithuanian army and his subordinates spent two weeks going from one village to another with an assignment to help “real sons and daughters of Lithuania,” that is, Lithuanians of Vilnius region. Lieutenant and his soldiers were in for a great shock. They were more than surprised when they did not come across a single Lithuanian-speaker in the villages they marched through – they even got a feeling of slight discomfort, as if they were in a foreign country. Some hope lit their faces only around Šalčininkėliai, Mielagėnai, Kirdeikiai and Laužonys, where they found entire Lithuanian-speaking villages.
There were some radical suggestions, too. The House of Commerce stated, in its 1939 “Economic Bulletin” (for official use only, not for publishing), that Lithuania would now have several hundred thousand pro-Polish citizens and moving several ministries to Vilnius would amount to nothing more than a “war against titans,” that one faced a great mass of Poles that could not be just dissolved. Suggestions were raised to tear this nest apart – physically and economically, with “siedlungspolitik” west to east, etc. Polish burghers were to be moved westwards, leaving all the treasures of Vilnius to Lithuanians; the more Lithuanian the region, the more integral the capital.
Coming next, the rest of the chapter discusses Smetona's attitude towards Jews.
