FOI-R--3990--SE_reducerad

FOI-R--3990--SE
indirect participation in the crimes against Latvia. 178 After 1991, Russians living
in Latvia continued to be alienated from Latvian culture and history. Vita Zelce,
a professor at the University of Latvia, stated that “official Soviet history
together with the history of modern Russia still served as the main instrument for
Russian social memory, including the falsifications and omissions of the Soviet
abuse of the conquered lands and people”. 179
According to Leo Dribins, a researcher specializing in social integration
processes, the “social integration process was significantly affected by historical
circumstances rooted in our recent past; those have also caused the fragmented
and contradictory understanding of the recent history of Latvia”. 180 This was
confirmed in a study, Ethno-political Tension in Latvia: Looking for the Conflict
Solution, carried out by the Baltic Institute of Social Sciences (BISS) in 2005.
This study emphasized that “ethnic conflicts in Latvia were based on language
policy and interpretation of history”. 181
Russia’s policy towards its compatriots living in Latvia is built on its idea of
Latvia as a newly founded state created in 1991, rather than as a continuation of
the state that existed before the Second World War. However, the doctrine of the
continuity of the Republic of Latvia was the legal and political basis for the
citizenship policy in Latvia after 1991. The doctrine of continuity states that the
Republic of Latvia was founded on 18 November 1918 and has continued its de
jure existence uninterrupted in spite of the occupation and annexation of 1940. 182
These divergent views persist as a confrontation between Russia’s policy towards
compatriots living abroad and the official position of Latvia on citizenship and
language legislation. Russia’s foreign policy implementers are trying to highlight
the opinion that Russians were not migrants to Soviet Latvia, but part of the
indigenous nation. In addition, if an occupation did not take place it would be
necessary to implement the zero option for citizenship.
Russia’s official interpretation of 20th century history is being disseminated in
Latvia through various channels. One is the foundation, Russkii mir , which was
established in 2007 by a decree of President Putin. The foundation’s board
consists of a number of prominent persons in Russia and its activities are largely
178 Kaprzns M. and Zelce, V. (2010): Identity, Social Memory and Cultural Trauma, in State research
program “National Identity”. Riga: LU SZF SPPI, p.17.
179 Zelze V. (2009): ‘History – responsibility – memory: Latvian experience’, in Rozenvalds J., Ijabs I.
(eds.) Latvija. Pārskats par tautas attīstību, 2008/2009: Atbildīgums. Riga: LU SPPI, p.46.
180 Dribins L. (2007): ‘Latvian history as factor of social integration process’, pp. 44–64, In Pretestība
sabiedrības integrācijai: cēloņi un sekas. Riga: LU FSI.
181 Zepa B., [ed.] (2005): Ethnopolitical tension in Latvia: looking for the conflict solution. Riga: BISS,
p.17,
http://s3.amazonaws.com/politika/public/article_files/1086/original/etnospriedz_EN.pdf132690296
8.
182 See Levits E. The 4th May Declaration in the Latvian Legal System, available at www.ltn.lv/~apklubs/index.htm.
75