9 May 1945 in the memory culture of the Baltic States
Day of victory or beginning of a second Soviet occupation?
The Baltic States actively counter the Russian symbolism of May 9, 1945, as a day of victory, remembering instead the beginning of Soviet occupation and the loss of their own independence. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania each present distinct national perspectives on this matter.
Estonia
deu. Estland, est. Eesti
Estonia is a country in north-eastern Europe. It is inhabited by around 1.3 million people and borders Latvia, Russia and the Baltic Sea. The most populous city and capital is Tallinn.
Today's Estonian state only regained its political independence in 1991 as a result of the so-called “Singing Revolution” in the Baltic states and in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Estonian independence was first proclaimed in 1918 and achieved through the “Estonian War of Independence” (1918-1920). As early as 1940, this first Estonian state was replaced by the “Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic”, which was founded under Soviet occupation. With an interruption due to the German occupation during the Second World War (1941-1944) and with slightly different borders, it was a constituent republic of the Soviet Union until 1991. Before 1918, the territory of present-day Estonia was part of the Russian Empire, with its northern part forming the Baltic Governorate of Estonia and its southern part the northern half of the Baltic Governorate of Livonia. In the High and Late Middle Ages and at the beginning of the early modern period, parts of today's country were also under Swedish, Danish and Polish rule, while the Livonian part was also under the sovereignty of the Teutonic Order until 1561.
Estonia has been part of the European Union and NATO since 2004.
Latvia
deu. Lettland, eng. Latvian Republic, lav. Latvija
Latvia is a Baltic state in the north-east of Europe and is home to about 1.9 million inhabitants. The capital of the country is Riga. The state borders in the west on the Baltic Sea and on the states of Lithuania, Estonia, Russia and Belarus. Latvia has been a member of the EU since 01.05.2004 and only became independent in the 19th century.
Lithuania
deu. Litauen, lit. Lietuva
Lithuania is a Baltic state in northeastern Europe and is home to approximately 2.8 million people. Vilnius is the capital and most populous city of Lithuania. The country borders the Baltic Sea, Poland, Belarus, Russia and Latvia. Lithuania only gained independence in 1918, which the country reclaimed in 1990 after several decades of incorporation into the Soviet Union.
In Germany and many other Western European countries, the three Baltic states are regarded as a unified historical region. And indeed, in their interpretation of May 9, 1945, the political-cultural elites and the public in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia agree. While in the former Soviet Union and still today in Russia and Belarus, it is seen as Victory Day over Nazi Germany, since 1990 it has never been part of the official state calendar in the Baltic states. Instead, it is understood as a symbolic date marking the beginning of the second Soviet occupation, which only ended with the restoration of independence at the end of the 20th century. However, this is where Baltic unity ends. The following analysis focuses on the memory culture in Lithuania, without losing sight of developments in Latvia and Estonia.
A return to the “golden age” of the interwar period
The first difference becomes clear when we look at the events that were given a special place in the three countries’ respective cultures of remembrance after they regained statehood in 1989/91. In Latvia and Estonia, rather than the events of May 9, these were the declarations of independence in the interwar period (Latvia:
November 18, 1918
November 18, 1918
Establishment of a provisional Estonian government in Tallinn and declaration of independence.
; Estonia:
February 24, 1918
February 24, 1918
Establishment of a provisional Estonian government in Tallinn and proclamation of independence.
). In Lithuania, too, the declaration of independence on
February 16, 1918
February 16, 1918
Declaration of independence by the Lithuanian Council (Taryba) in Vilnius.
, was declared a national holiday immediately after the restoration of sovereignty in 1990. However, another event that should not be underestimated was the (presumed) coronation day of the Lithuanian King Mindaugas on July 6, 1253, which stands as a symbol for the first Lithuanian state, the independent Grand Duchy. This date also became a national holiday in 1990.
Although the selection of new myths was influenced by the different histories of the three countries, it was strongly overlaid by a shared attitude towards Soviet communism. The majority of the population considered the communist regime to be an 'abnormal' phenomenon and so, as people rebuilt their lives and countries after the war, they strove to restore a sense of 'normality’ that they believed had existed in the years 1919 to 1940. In terms of memory culture, this meant a return to the central places of remembrance of the interwar period. For Latvia and Estonia, this "golden age" between the world wars was when they first gained independence and established national administrations and autonomous education systems, which visibly affirmed their statehood. In Lithuania’s case, however, the aurea aetas – the golden era – was, as mentioned above, the time of the independent Grand Duchy, when Lithuania had been a powerful state.
Thus, there was no room for May 9 in Lithuania's culture of remembrance. Meanwhile, in Latvia and Estonia, this date was only commemorated only insofar as it was associated with a loss of independence and the struggle to regain it.
Thus, there was no room for May 9 in Lithuania's culture of remembrance. Meanwhile, in Latvia and Estonia, this date was only commemorated only insofar as it was associated with a loss of independence and the struggle to regain it.
Commemoration of the SS Volunteer Units
For this reason, Latvia and Estonia2 turned their attention to the Latvian and Estonian SS volunteer units very early on. In both countries, such units were formed in 1943 and fought on the Eastern Front against the Red Army. Later, forced conscriptions also took place. Latvia took the lead in reassessing these divisions, designating March 16, 1944 – a day when both divisions fought on the same front line – as "Legionnaires' Day" and adding it to the list of official state commemorative days in 1998. However, due to pressure from Russia, this decision was reversed in 1999.3 Even though official recognition was withdrawn, unofficial commemorative events continue to be held annually in Latvia. Estonia has followed a similar approach in its remembrance of local SS units.
Within the European Union – particularly in Germany – as well as in Russia, the way Latvia and Estonia have approached the remembrance of SS legionnaires is widely seen as an example of historical revisionism. The two Baltic states frequently face accusations of rehabilitating National Socialism and downplaying the possible involvement of SS legionnaires in the Holocaust. After all, the SS was officially declared a "criminal organization" in the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials. This perspective stands in stark contrast to the collective memory in Latvia and Estonia, where the emphasis is placed on different historical aspects. Critics argue that the Latvian and Estonian SS legions fought for Nazi Germany and should be regarded as collaborators. However, for many Latvians and Estonians, the primary significance of these units lies in their fight against the Soviet Union toward the end of the war – an effort seen as ultimately aimed at securing Latvian and Estonian independence.
This example illustrates the complexity and contradictions inherent in memory politics, particularly in countries that endured the occupation of two opposing ideological regimes – National Socialism and Stalinism.
In the case of Lithuania, it also becomes clear that memory culture is a changeable phenomenon. A significant shift occurred after 1990, particularly with the country’s accession to the European Union in 2004. At that moment, the national myth centered around the – symbolized by the coronation of Mindaugas on July 6, 1253 – lost its relevance. The Grand Duke’s reign had also marked Lithuania’s conversion to Catholicism, signifying its connection to Europe. However, with Lithuania’s successful integration into the European Union, the pro-European aspirations of Lithuanian society had now been fully realized.
Within the European Union – particularly in Germany – as well as in Russia, the way Latvia and Estonia have approached the remembrance of SS legionnaires is widely seen as an example of historical revisionism. The two Baltic states frequently face accusations of rehabilitating National Socialism and downplaying the possible involvement of SS legionnaires in the Holocaust. After all, the SS was officially declared a "criminal organization" in the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials. This perspective stands in stark contrast to the collective memory in Latvia and Estonia, where the emphasis is placed on different historical aspects. Critics argue that the Latvian and Estonian SS legions fought for Nazi Germany and should be regarded as collaborators. However, for many Latvians and Estonians, the primary significance of these units lies in their fight against the Soviet Union toward the end of the war – an effort seen as ultimately aimed at securing Latvian and Estonian independence.
This example illustrates the complexity and contradictions inherent in memory politics, particularly in countries that endured the occupation of two opposing ideological regimes – National Socialism and Stalinism.
In the case of Lithuania, it also becomes clear that memory culture is a changeable phenomenon. A significant shift occurred after 1990, particularly with the country’s accession to the European Union in 2004. At that moment, the national myth centered around the
Grand Duchy of Lithuania
rus. Velikoe knjažestvo Litovskoe, rus. Великое княжество Литовское, pol. Wielkie Księstwo Litewskie, bel. Vialikaie Kniastva Litoŭskaie, bel. Вялікае Княства Літоўскае, lit. Lietuvos Didžioji Kunigaikštystė, lat. Magnus Ducatus Lituania, deu. Großfürstentum Litauen, Ruthenien und Schemaitien, deu. Großfürstentum Litauen, rus. Velikoe knâžestvo Litovskoe, . Velikoe knęžestvo Litovskoe, . Великое кнѧзство Литовское, bel. Vâlìkaê Knâstva Lìtoŭskaê, bel. Vjlikae Knjastva Litoŭskae
The Grand Duchy of Lithuania emerged at the latest around 1230 in the course of the unification of the Lithuanian duchies. As the Teutonic Order barred access to the Baltic Sea, the Grand Duchy's expansion was largely oriented towards the east and south, where it competed with the Principality of Moscow for dominance over the Ruthenian population. Grand Duke Gediminas conquered Kiev in 1320. From 1386, the Grand Duchy was under the same ruler as the Polish kingdom (personal union), also in order to stand its area against the two rivals to the west and east. In 1569, Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania also became unified states.
Russian pressure on the Baltic cultures of remembrance
Another factor behind the change was Russia's policy of remembrance. Since the beginning of the Putin era, the myth of victory in the Great Patriotic War has been imposed on other states – especially Poland and the Baltic states. The official Russian invitation to the heads of state of the Baltic countries to take part in the events marking the 60th anniversary of May 9, 1945, in Moscow ultimately triggered a broad debate about May 9.
In Lithuania, it was not only historians who took part in the discussion, but also other groups including entrepreneurs, politicians, and journalists. Probably for the first time after 1990, a new assessment of May 9 was formulated – the notion of the “war after the war”, which soon became widespread. This interpretation recalled that hundreds of thousands of Lithuanians had fallen victim to Stalinist deportation and terror policies. From 1944 onward, Lithuanian nationalist partisans fought against Soviet rule. In the end, the Lithuanian government declined the invitation to Moscow.
Due to Lithuania's involvement in the Holocaust, it was impossible for Lithuanian politicians to completely ignore this date. Even in the run-up to EU accession, the issue of complicity, which clashed with the widespread narrative of victimhood, had emerged. For this reason, a conscious decision was made to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany in Vilnius on May 8, 2005. This event invited World War II veterans from both sides of the front: soldiers who had fought in the Soviet Army during the war, as well as veterans from the local Lithuanian Plechavičius units
In Lithuania, it was not only historians who took part in the discussion, but also other groups including entrepreneurs, politicians, and journalists. Probably for the first time after 1990, a new assessment of May 9 was formulated – the notion of the “war after the war”, which soon became widespread. This interpretation recalled that hundreds of thousands of Lithuanians had fallen victim to Stalinist deportation and terror policies. From 1944 onward, Lithuanian nationalist partisans fought against Soviet rule. In the end, the Lithuanian government declined the invitation to Moscow.
Due to Lithuania's involvement in the Holocaust, it was impossible for Lithuanian politicians to completely ignore this date. Even in the run-up to EU accession, the issue of complicity, which clashed with the widespread narrative of victimhood, had emerged. For this reason, a conscious decision was made to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany in Vilnius on May 8, 2005. This event invited World War II veterans from both sides of the front: soldiers who had fought in the Soviet Army during the war, as well as veterans from the local Lithuanian Plechavičius units
Lithuanian Territorial Defense Force
In 1944, with German approval, Lithuanian volunteer units were set up under the command of Lithuanian General Povilas Plechavičius and were only to be deployed on Lithuanian territory. As the German side rightly suspected that these units saw themselves as a national army and their military value was low, they were disarmed again: Some of the soldiers were murdered in Paneriai, many were pressed into Wehrmacht units.
and the
Polish Armija Krajowa (Home Army)
Home Army
operating in the Vilnius area. The Lithuanian and Polish forces had fought each other during World War II due to territorial disputes, and thus the debate surrounding the significance of May 9 had already contributed to the formal signing of a reconciliation declaration in the Lithuanian presidential palace in the autumn of 2004.
Cover of “Sibiro Haiku. Eine Graphic Novel aus Litauen” (Siberian Haiku: A Graphic Novel from Lithuania) by Jurga Vilè, with illustrations by Lina Itagaki, translated into German by Saskia Drude (Basel, 2020). Based on true events, this graphic novel tells the story of an eight-year-old boy, Algis, who is deported from Lithuania to Siberia with his family by Soviet troops in 1941. It tells of the harsh living conditions, the struggle for survival in the cold, and the longing for home, but also the power of imagination and hope. The book has won numerous awards in Lithuania and was awarded with the German Youth Literature Prize in the category of Youth Literature. Baobab Books,
Cover of “Sibiro Haiku. Eine Graphic Novel aus Litauen” (Siberian Haiku: A Graphic Novel from Lithuania) by Jurga Vilè, with illustrations by Lina Itagaki, translated into German by Saskia Drude (Basel, 2020). Based on true events, this graphic novel tells the story of an eight-year-old boy, Algis, who is deported from Lithuania to Siberia with his family by Soviet troops in 1941. It tells of the harsh living conditions, the struggle for survival in the cold, and the longing for home, but also the power of imagination and hope. The book has won numerous awards in Lithuania and was awarded with the German Youth Literature Prize in the category of Youth Literature. Baobab Books,
The commemoration on May 8, 2005, was positively received by all veteran organizations. However, this successful memory policy did not give rise to a new tradition – one that could have involved those social groups who did not agree with the official interpretation of May 9. Above all, the event was not used to integrate the Russian national minority in Lithuania more strongly. This minority continued, even after 2005, to observe May 9 as a victory day in the traditional sense.
Similar discussions took place in Latvia and Estonia, with the heads of state of the two Baltic nations responding differently to Putin’s invitation: while the President of Latvia attended the Moscow event, a negative view of May 9 solidified, one that remains unchanged to this day.
Similar discussions took place in Latvia and Estonia, with the heads of state of the two Baltic nations responding differently to Putin’s invitation: while the President of Latvia attended the Moscow event, a negative view of May 9 solidified, one that remains unchanged to this day.
The Chairman of the Association of Soldiers of the Vietine Rinktinė (Lithuanian Special Units), Antanas Paulavičius, and the Chairman of the Veterans' Association of the Armija Krajowa for Vilnius, Vaclavas Pacyno, exchange the signed documents of the Peace Declaration; Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius, September 2, 2004. Džoja Gunda Barysaitė,
The Chairman of the Association of Soldiers of the Vietine Rinktinė (Lithuanian Special Units), Antanas Paulavičius, and the Chairman of the Veterans' Association of the Armija Krajowa for Vilnius, Vaclavas Pacyno, exchange the signed documents of the Peace Declaration; Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius, September 2, 2004. Džoja Gunda Barysaitė,
The Chairman of the Association of Soldiers of the Vietine Rinktinė (Lithuanian Special Units), Antanas Paulavičius, and the Chairman of the Veterans' Association of the Armija Krajowa for Vilnius, Vaclavas Pacyno, sign the Peace Declaration; Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius, September 2, 2004. Džoja Gunda Barysaitė,
The Chairman of the Association of Soldiers of the Vietine Rinktinė (Lithuanian Special Units), Antanas Paulavičius, and the Chairman of the Veterans' Association of the Armija Krajowa for Vilnius, Vaclavas Pacyno, sign the Peace Declaration; Presidency of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius, September 2, 2004. Džoja Gunda Barysaitė,
Russia's sanctions
These debates have also fueled another commemorative conflict with Russia. In 2007, an Estonian decision provoked Russia's displeasure: the bronze soldiers' memorial, the central symbol of “victory in the Great Patriotic War” and the “liberation of Estonia” from German occupation, was relocated from the center of Tallinn to a cemetery. Mass demonstrations ensued, involving mainly members of the Russian minority in Estonia, who garnered broad support from Russia. In response, Russia unofficially imposed economic sanctions against Estonia, resulting in losses of approximately 450 million euros for the country.4
As with the sanctions previously applied to Lithuania (including bullying tactics in the food trade and a freeze on oil deliveries due to allegedly defective pipelines), these actions demonstrate that Russia no longer defended its ideological symbols merely through rhetoric but also with concrete measures. However, even this approach had little effect on the evaluation of May 9. On the contrary, the negative perception intensified further after Russia's aggression against Ukraine, particularly following the occupation of Crimea in 2014.
The war initiated by Russia against Ukraine in February 2022 solidified the current interpretation of May 9. In Latvia and Estonia, all related events were banned. In Lithuania, there were also no major celebrations. In response to the Russian attack on Ukraine, the Lithuanians went even further than the Estonians had in 2007, prohibiting people from wearing the ribbon of St. George
As with the sanctions previously applied to Lithuania (including bullying tactics in the food trade and a freeze on oil deliveries due to allegedly defective pipelines), these actions demonstrate that Russia no longer defended its ideological symbols merely through rhetoric but also with concrete measures. However, even this approach had little effect on the evaluation of May 9. On the contrary, the negative perception intensified further after Russia's aggression against Ukraine, particularly following the occupation of Crimea in 2014.
The war initiated by Russia against Ukraine in February 2022 solidified the current interpretation of May 9. In Latvia and Estonia, all related events were banned. In Lithuania, there were also no major celebrations. In response to the Russian attack on Ukraine, the Lithuanians went even further than the Estonians had in 2007, prohibiting people from wearing the ribbon of St. George
Ribbon of Saint George
The St. George's Ribbon is a Russian military insignia (three black and two orange stripes). Under the Putin regime, it became the most important symbol of the victory over Nazi Germany.
and dismantling the monument to Soviet soldiers at the Antakalnis cemetery in Vilnius.May 9th as a symbol of Soviet rule
The war against Ukraine has marked yet another shift in the Baltic cultures of memory: Since Russia’s invasion, May 9 has been completely ignored, and instead, the memory of the loss of independence in June 1940 has resurfaced. This historical experience has also been reflected in the foreign policy of the Baltic states, who, together with Poland, have taken the toughest stance against the Russian aggressor within the European Union. In terms of their Gross Domestic Product, these four countries are among the largest supporters of Ukraine. This policy has remained undisputed in the public sphere.
Thus, we find a clear answer to the question raised in the title of this article: Despite Russia's attempts to impose its interpretation of May 9 on the Baltic states, this day is not remembered there as a day of victory, but rather as a symbol of Soviet rule.
Thus, we find a clear answer to the question raised in the title of this article: Despite Russia's attempts to impose its interpretation of May 9 on the Baltic states, this day is not remembered there as a day of victory, but rather as a symbol of Soviet rule.
