Lithuania

1. Lithuania Dan Natzke Geog. 308.001

2. Location • Southeast corner of the Baltic • Littoral. • Borders with Russia, Poland, • Belarus and Latvia • Geographical center of Europe • near Moletai, 25 km north of • Vilnius Russia

3. Landscape • Characterized by low rolling hills, • mixed coniferous and deciduous for- • ests, numerous small lakes, ponds, rivers • and streams typical of a glaciated land- • scape. • The Curonian Spit, below right, is a • Unique feature on the shores of the • Baltic. It consists of a stabilized string • of sand dunes that began to accumu- • late at the end of the last ice age. Today • it is a popular tourist destination.

4. Early History • Indo-European ancestors of the Balts • move toward the shores of the S.E. Baltic • 2300 – 2000 BC replacing earlier Finno- • Ugrians. • Differentiation of Baltic peoples into • tribes 1600-100 BC. • Pressure from E. Slavs forced Eastern • Balts (including tribes later becoming • Lithuanian) to the eastern Baltic Sea in the • 6th century AD. • Up to the 13th century developed highly • militaristic feudal society led by dukes.

5. The Grand Duchy and Golden Age (13 – 14thC) • Grand Duke Mindaugas formed a state to • face German crusading orders and began • eastward expansion (early 13th C). • Established capitol at Kernave (right). • Successive Grand Dukes continued to • hold out against the crusaders and greatly • expand the Duchy into Slavic lands. • The 14th and 15th centuries marked Lithuania’s • golden age. • Grand Duke Vytautas ruled from Vilnius and • Trakai (left) and briefly expanded the Duchy • to the Black Sea. • His cousin, Jogaila, was chosen by Polish • nobles to be the Polish king. Jogaila converted • to the Roman Church in 1385 and began the • 400-year long union of Poland and Lithuania.

6. The Golden Age 1385 – Last state in Europe to Christianize. 1410 – Battle of Zalgiris (Tannenberg). 1569 – Union of Lublin formalized the poli- tical union between Poland and Lithuania. 1569 – 1795 The Commonwealth of Poland- Lithuania. Grand Duchy of Lithuania K. of Poland

7. Partition of the Commonwealth • Rise of Muscovy challenges the Common- • wealth hold on eastern frontier beginning • with Ivan III and especially Ivan IV. • Increasing weakness of the Polish Sejm. • Increasing Russian influence in Poland. • Poland partitioned out of existence • I 1772 (Russia, Prussia, Austria) • II 1793 (Russia, Prussia) • III 1795 (Russia, Prussia, Austria)

8. Russian Occupation Russification 1863 – 1905 -Religion -Language and alphabet -Simultaneous national revival

9. Independence, 1918 -- 1939 • Independence, 16 February 1918 • Parliamentary democracy • Smetona coup, 1926 – democracy’s end • Increasing national chauvinism • End of sovereignty through Soviet base agree- • ment, 10 October 1939 • Holocaust in Lithuania – upwards of 200,000 • murdered, 1941– 1942

10. Occupation 1940 – 1991 • Soviet military occupation, June 1940. • “elections”, then incorporation to the USSR, • August 1940. • Abbreviated sovietization • -nationalization • -collectivization • -deportations • German occupation June 1941 – Fall 1944. • Soviet control returns 1944. • 1944 – 53 Sovietization finished what re- • mained undone in 1940-41. • 1944 – 53 partisan war. • Strict communist party control of economic, • social, political life remained to 1980’s.

11. Independence Renewed • Gorbachev’s reforms, 1985 – 1991 • formation of independent • cultural, ecological organizations with nationalist • undercurrent. • Sajudis • Calendar protest/singing revolution/”Baltic Way” • Independence renewed 11 March 1991 • Two failed Soviet attempts to reverse secession • -10 -- 13 January 1991 • -August 1991

12. Religion Predominantly Roman Catholic (79%) Non-believers 9.5% Orthodox 4.1% Old Believers 0.8% Lutherans 0.7% Historically large Jewish population (up to 240,000 before WWII). Practicing Jews in 2002 at 1,272 (.037%). Small Sunni Muslim population at 2860 (.082%). Karaim – originally a Turkic people who practice the Mosaic/Karaim faith number 258 faithful.

13. Demography • Relatively homogeneous • Population of over 80% • Lithuanians. • Total population dropped • By 5% between 1989 and • 2002. • Ethnic minorities gradually • emigrating from Lithuania. • At 6.7% of the current population Poles replaced Russians as the Second • largest minority in the years since independence. • Tatars outnumber the neighboring Latvians (3,235 to 2,955 respectively). • 4,007 are of Jewish background. • Belarusians and Ukrainians made up under 2% of the population in 2002. • The countryside is almost entirely Lithuanian. • Urban areas contain most of the non-ethnic Lithuanian population, • especially Russians.

14. Ethnic Distribution as of 1989

15. Traditional Lithuanian Ethnographic Regions of the 19th Century

16. The Karaim • One of Lithuania’s smallest minorities. • Currently (2002) number 258 – about half their • number in 1959. • Community centered at Trakai with outposts in • Vilnius and Panevezys. • -Related to other smaller communities • in Ukraine and Poland • Lithuanian Karaim take part in the national eco- • nomic, political and social life of the state. • Prominent Karaim, Helena Kobeckaite, served • as Lithuanian Minister of Minorities in 1992 and • helped to shape the minorities policies of the • newly independent state.

17. Karaim Culture and Language under Threat • Lithuanian Karaim community strongest, most numerous in ECE. • If the community dies out, the rest of ECE Karaim will likely follow. • Closely associated with Lithuania, especially at Trakai, Vilnius and • in the north near the Latvian border in Birzai and Panavezys. • “Karaim” – describes their ethnicity, language and culture. • “Karaism” – along with “Mosaic religion”, describes their religion. • “Karaite” – is an adherent to Karaism.

18. Karaim Culture and Language under Threat • Surrounded by Baltic and Slavic speakers. • -About 50 in Lithuania still conversant in Karaim, a Turkic language. • -8 Still speak the language in Ukraine and none in Poland. • Dwindling numbers threaten complete absorption into the surrounding population. • Traditional practices limit growth • -Endogamy • -No proselytism for new members • -In a mixed marriage the non- • Karaite is not allowed to join • the community. Mixed mar- • riages effectively pull the small • community apart.

19. Origins of the Karaim • Most likely from Khazaria, located between the Don • And Volga Rivers (West/East), and the steppe from the • Caucasus northward. • Khazars – nomadic Turkic tribes that controlled east- • west trade in the region between 6-10 centuries AD. • During Khazaria’s peak of power the region was a • center of a new religion – Karaism. • Karaism – from a sect of Mesopotamian Jews in 8th C • who based their beliefs solely on a literal interpretation • of the first books of the Bible in reaction to the increa- • sing influence of the Talmud and Rabbinical scholar- • ship in mainstream Judaism. • Strong Islamic influence in dogma of the religion inc- • luding: • -trust in human free will • -avoiding human depiction of the Holy • “Karaim” derives from Hebrew and Arabic words for • “to read/recite the Holy Writ”. • Spread into Khazaria in the following centuries.

20. How the Karaim Came to Lithuania • By the 11th century the Mosaic reli- • gion (Karaism) and • Turkish culture melded in the Crimea • creating a distinct Karaim ethnicity. • In the late 14th century the former • Khan of the Golden Horde, Tokh- • tamysh, whom Tamerlane had bani- • shed, sought refuge with Lithuanian • Grand Duke Vytautas. • 1397 – Lithuania involved in a • conflict between Tatar factions, meets • with some military success. • 1397 – 1398 upwards of 600 Karaim • and Tatar families move to Lithuania • and settle primarily in Trakai but also • At major frontier towns such as • Panevezys and Birzai.

21. Karaim in Lithuania • Special privileges given to the Karaim probably part of the agreement for • their participation in the conflict with the Golden Horde. • Trakai palace guard • Magdeburg rights to Karaim communities in 1441 • Legal status equal to other cities in the duchy • Legal self-jurisdiction • Independent Karaim administration • Elected leader (nominated by representatives of the Duke) • At Trakai, Karaim lived seperately from Lithuanians and had their own • city seal. • Spatial, legal separation helped to deflect assimilation pressure.

22. Traditional Occupations • Served a role similar to Cossacks • in Ukraine – border guard. • Military – fighting and frequently • suffering disproportionately in Lithuania’s • wars. • - possible separate military unit • - some Karaim might have held • leadership roles in the military • Agriculture – especially breeding horses. • Interpreters and envoys between the Gol- • den Horde and Lithuania. • Several Karaim were physicians to im- • portant Lithuanian and Polish magnate • Families.

23. Recent History • Russian authorities granted partial rights to • Karaim after they avoided conflict in 1863 revolution. • -independent religious leadership maintained • -exemption from military service • -similar rights as rest of the empire’s subjects • -disassociated from Jews – labeled as • “Karaim” not “Jews-Karaim” • Change in classification helped the small population • of Karaim avoid decimation in the Holocaust. • Independence of Lithuania and Poland encouraged a • Karaim revival. • Revival interrupted during Soviet occupation when • the Karaim Kenessas closed and cultural activity • slowed. • 1991 Independence brought another revival in • Karaim heritage.

24. Ignalina–Background • Lithuania primarily agricultural to 1960’s • lacked preexisting industrial base • partisan conflict 1944-53 • surplus of rural labor • Industrialization/urbanization programs begin in • 1960’s. • In 1960 peat made up 26% of fuel consumed • By 1970 this declined to 5% • Moscow dictated industrial and urban policy –re- • public level cut out of decision making.

25. 1970’s Energy Crisis 1970’s – demand for energy doubled every four years. Energy resource poor Lithuania depen- dent on foreign fuel. Druzhba oil pipeline coal and gas meager hydropower Baltic oil exploration beginning Increasing industrialization and urba- nization required greater fuel supply, potentially straining available resources. Nuclear power provided the answer.

26. Central Planning and the Ignalina NPP • Mid ’70’s Brezhnev plan to increase number • of nuclear stations in European portions of • USSR. • Sites chosen virtually without consent of local • authorities, scientists. • Ignalina location – near Latvian and Belorusian • SSR’s at Lithuania’s largest lake, Druksai. • Ignalina to solve energy problem in Baltic. • INPP original plans of 1970’s – two 1,000 MW • RBMK graphite moderated (Chernobyl-type) • reactors.

27. Opposition to INPP • Moscow did not confer with Lithuanian • scientists or conduct geological study (deter- • mine earthquake threat, effects to ground • water). • Lake Druksai in popular vacation area near • Aukstaitija National Park. • Situated near densely populated areas. • Moscow – size of INPP increased to four • 1,500 MW reactors – planned facility to be • the largest in the USSR. • Lithuanian Academy of Sciences – Druksai • not large enough to cool the plant’s giant re- • actors. 2.5-3 MW was the maximum. • Lithuanian scientists publicly criticize INPP • Plans in 1980 article. • Lithuanian and Russian scientists discuss. • Moscow reduced the number to 3 reactors – • still too much for the lake to cool. • Concession remarkable pre-Gorbachev.

28. Gorbachev’s Reforms and Chernobyl • Before 1986, few Lithuanians even knew of • Ignalina. • Glasnost allows for freer discussion. • Perestroika restructuring allows for the • formation of some independent organizations. • Chernobyl + reform = public opposition • Lith. media quiet in analysis of Chernobyl • No fanfare as Ignalina reactor 2 goes online • In 1987. • Jan 1988 strict military censorship on NPP’s • lifted – floodgates open for protest. • The nascent environmental protest movement • emboldened by success fighting oil exploration • at Nida. Academy of Sciences scaled down • Ignalina’s size.

29. Independent Organizations • Late 1987, early 1988 Zemyna, the first independent organization, • formed under auspices of Komsomol and Lithuanian Academy of Sciences. • Environmental focus. • Scathing criticism of Ignalina, seemingly with support of Science Acad. • March 1988 – claimed Ignalina caused mutations at Druksai. • Spring 1988 – collected up to 70k signatures against Ignalina. • By late spring, Lithuanian politicians began to back the environmental • movement noting the surge in public opinion against the plant. • Sensed popular dissatisfaction with Moscow policy and the party.

30. Environmental  Independence Movement • Zemyna and eco-mvt plays the nat’l card • --Moscow policy = nat’l annihilation • Zemyna  mass movement, the environ- • mental wing of Sajudis (Lith. Mvt. for • Perestroika) • Sajudis, Ignalina central role in national • movement. • Ignalina, symbol of Soviet impositions • -colonization • -threat to environment • -fear of assimilation • Protest stops construction of reactor #3 • Public backed politicians supporting pop- • ular ecological movement. Necessary to • maintain public support to hold power – • not Moscow’s sanction.

31. Nationalist Character of Protest • Protests at Ignalina took on nationalistic over- • tones • -plays • -concerts • -folk dances • For the protesters, these events became a • Showcase of ethnic Lithuanian vitality in the • face of Soviet oppression. • Not long after mass protests at Ignalina, Sa- • judis moved away from the Ignalina, environ- • mental issues and focused on political change. • Popular concern for environmental issues • caused by Soviet occupation was the founda- • tion for a mass political movement opposing • Moscow.

32. Ignalina after Independence • Ignalina ensures energy self-sufficiency. • (traditional plants require energy imports – • can meet energy needs but at twice the cost) • A matter of survival for Lithuania. • Lithuania became the state most depen- • dent on nuclear energy. • -around 80% from Ignalina • (delays in modernization, less use • of non-nuclear sources) • Energy export to Latvia, Belarus. • Economics Ministry wants to export Igna- • lina’s power to Poland, west to EU. • Important source of revenue.

33. Ignalina and EU Accession • Neighboring countries, esp in Scandinavia • fear a second Chernobyl. • Considered the 3rd least safe plant in Europe. • Requirement for Lithuanian accession to EU – • shut down Ignalina, reactor #1 2005, #2 2009. • EU pledged up to 375 million Euros by 2006 • for safety upgrades, preparations to decom- • mission. • Lith. Government agreed to the stipulations in • 1999. • Currently Vilnius claims $3 billion beyond EU • agreement to decommission and arrange a • replacement.

34. The Battle over the INPP • Lithuanian gov’t – without extra EU funds social, • economic effects drastic, gov’t lacks funds to meet • the agreement. • If the plant begins decommission in 2005 the result • could be great detriment to economy as European • energy market opens to Lithuania. • Yet agrees the plant must close, unsafe. • “Euroskepticism” high among Lithuanians • -EU stand on Ignalina • -small agricultural subsidies • Some Lithuanian authorities want to keep the station • into 2017 or later.

35. The Battle over the INPP • Visaginas built 1975 specifically to house workers • at Ignalina. • -Current population: 33,800 • -86% ethnic minorities (Russian, Russian • speakers) • -80% of region’s income from INPP • Economically least developed region in Lithuania • At plant’s closure Ministry of Economy predicts • depression in the region. • -78% business may face bankruptcy • -22% cut jobs • National Labor Exchange predicts that $16,500 • necessary for creation of each new job. • Visaginas region now administratively separated • from Utena county to deal with future economic, • social problems. • NGO’s attempt to mitigate negative affects in • region by developing business sector.