By Yves Plasseraud, Paris

A series of painful and worrying events (Stankeras holocaust denial, Vilnius neo-nazi parade, desacration of the 9th Fort Memorial… the list is sadly long) have recently drawn the attention of Western intellectual and journalists towards what seems to be a substantial increase of antisemitism in Lithuania. The name of Lithuania, associated for centuries (during the period of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania particularly) with the idea of tolerance and social peace, is now more and more being seen as synonym of antisemitism, racism, xenophobia and, another field, homophobia. For many observers, Lithuania is now leading the group of “small” countries where human Rights principles appear forgotten !

There is obviously some exaggeration in this perception, but the recent evolution of Lithuania’s public opinion remains indeed worrying. What happened to this country ? Let’s first try to determine if there are specific causes in the Lithuanian case, and, in the affirmative, what is their nature.

It does not seem to be the experience of World War Two of extensive collaboration with the Nazis and participation to the Holocaust. Countries like Latvia, Moldova or Ukraine share the same terrible memories. It can hardly be the current xenophobia, it is much worse in a country like neighboring Russia. Obliteration of the Holocaust responsibilities seems more obvious in Latvia or in Moldova than in Lithuania. In these conditions, what can be the specificity of the Lithuanian problem?

A systematical scrutiny of the situation points to two series of causes to this disturbing Lithuanian current evolution.

Those which are common to all post-communist States

If we look at post communist European societies, we observe that all of them are, to various degrees, infested by prejudice and social aggressivity. The wars in Yugoslavia and in the Caucasus in the ‘90 frightened rightfully the West. The international situation has now cooled down in these areas, but let us think about the anti-Roma “rage” in the former Czechoslovakian space, the anti- Tchiorni pogroms in Russia or the antagonisms between Hungarians and Slovaks, just to name a few hot cases. These antagonisms have long roots in the past, which usually can easily be traced back.

When communism collapsed in Europe in 1991, most of the pre-1945 ideas, prejudices and hatreds, “frozen” by the brutal communization came back to the surface. Among these ideologies of the late thirties, xenophobia, antisemitism (Nazi, but also to a certain extent Soviet antisemitism) and racism were not the least. All the intellectual, moral and social work done in Western Europe during these some 50 years, which, inhibited in “Eastern Europe” by the communist ideology, had not taken place, had to be suddenly undertaken. This was to be started almost from scratch and in a great mental confusion, particularly in view of the fact that the Western paradigm proved itself very different from the image it had – seen from outside – given until then.
In this matter, the current Lithuanian Republic does not differ from its neighbors and suffers from the same trauma.

One more element can be identified. All the social work done by NGO’s in the last 20 years on behalf of Europe (CoE, OSCE and EC) around the concept of national minorities have indirectly lead to a greater consciousness of the groups and subsequently to a kind of re-ethnicization of the society. The difference between “us” and “them” has thus considerably increased.

Causes which seem to be more specific to Lithuania

Several Lithuanian specificities can be identified.

• Major Societal discomfort: Several signs map this situation such as the high rate of suicides (the worst in Europe), the generalized pessimism and the traditional Lithuanian taste for self – depreciation combined with ethno-nationalism.

• Consciousness gap between the intellectual and political elites (often conscious but limited in number) and the rest of the population. More than elsewhere, these “elites” are largely discredited, or at least, not taken seriously !

• Absence of a clear image of what their country is really in the public opinion. Between the cherished image of the pre

• 1795 Grand Duchy, the peasant “ethnic” Republic of Smetona, the Soviet Lithuanian Republic and the current post-soviet State, the images and representations seldom match.

The consequence is a great degree of social anxiety – intensified by the current economic crisis and subsequent massive immigration. In such a context heterophobia and consequently the search for scapegoats and all what goes with it, is unfortunately a frequent reaction.

What can be done by the West to improve the situation?

The aim of the Western observers should be to help reconcile the people with itself and to make the different images of the country readable and coherent in the eyes of the average Lithuanian.

Recognizing the progresses and the efforts made (they are indeed numerous, and the authorities play their part !) is certainly the best way to make the justified critics receivable by the Lithuanian public.

We should also make our best to help the Lithuanian liberal intellectuals who are promoting the ideas of tolerance. In the Lithuanian case, they appear to be mostly social workers and academics (often working in Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas, but of course not only) and often, in one way or another, related to the American born Santara Sviesa current of thought.

It is obviously through a more intensive Europeanization that the country of the White Knight will be able to chase its devils and fully integrate in the European Community.