Lithuania and the memory of the Shoah (Holocaust)

By Yves Plasseraud, Paris

May Lithuania rot in hell for a thousand years! This is what one could recently read in a Letter to VilNews’ Editor. This vindictive sentence sums up, in a nutshell, the language of a number of the current Western (including Israeli) and Russian discourses on this Baltic country. The rationale behind this demonization is what the authors of these writings consider as the radical and supposedly built-in anti-Semitism of the Lithuanians.
To support their demonstration, they argue that the « Lithuanians » have recently been systematically trying to obliterate their massive participation in the Shoah (Holocaust) by putting forward the forged thesis of the so-called « double genocide ». Two of their main arguments in this respect are the Lithuanian support to the 2008 Prague Declaration on European Conscience and Communism, and on the one hand, the name and the exhibits of the Vilnius Genocide Museum on the other hand (displaying much more about the Soviet oppression than about the Nazi one).
These two points are indeed objectively questionable and, more generally, despite many significant progresses, there are evidently a number of things to criticize in the Lithuanian handling of the Jewish question. Nothing however justifies the current intensity of their gesticulations and the « ontological » hate against this country they manifest ! In these matters, Lithuania is certainly not worse than most of the post-soviet countries of the East-Central European Area. Amongst the nations of the area, Lithuania is probably the one which has accomplished the biggest steps toward recognition and information of its dark pages in history, and these critics appear to systematically ignore this fact. The recent reaction of the informed public about the recent neo-Nazi parade in Vilnius offers a good illustration of this evolution.
If these current harsh and oversized critics really wanted to help the Lithuanian society progress forward on the way of recognition and democracy, it seems evident that they would adopt a more acceptable and convincing language. They would also address the Lithuanian public and not the Western media which are basically very uniformed of these matters and furthermore deprived of any contacts with the Lithuanian population.
If their aim is really an improvement of the situation on the Eastern-Central European ground at large, it also appears that they should concentrate on what takes place currently in the field of human rights. In this respect, a country like Russia where racism is unfortunately omnipresent and where historical revisionism is often a state Policy should be a central preoccupation! On the contrary, they regularly side-up with Moscow in criticizing the small neighbouring countries!
No, their attitude is not rational and obviously originates from somewhere else and has other objectives which – at this point – are unfortunately not very clear.