CEU eTD Collection Second Reader: Second Supervisor: THE ROLE OF THE BALTIC ENTENTE IN THE ROLETHE OFTHEBALTICENTENTE MENTAL MAPPING OF THEESTONIA, THE BALTICCONFIGURATION: LATVIA & LITHUANIA, 1934-1940 Professor Karl Hall Professor Alfred J. Rieber JAMES MONTGOMERY WOLLEN History Department in partial Central European University fulfillment of Master of Arts Budapest, Hungary Budapest, Submitted to 2012 CEU eTD Collection accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the of Author. permission written the without made be not may instructions such with accordance librarian. This page mustform a partof any such copies made. Further copies made in lodgedand in Central the Library.European maybe from University the Details obtained Author the by given instructions the with accordance in only made be may in part, or full Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in i CEU eTD Collection ABSTRACT presentinterwarduring This the period. the that development suggests of the The findings of this enquiry suggest that the idea of such a concept was to War. World Second existed prior the determine whether or not the notion of the ‘Baltic States’, at agovernmental level, is of this to Theexercise areanalysed. purpose of Balticthe Entente conferences diplomatic eleven the of discourse and rhetoric the Constructivism, and Mapping Mental of approaches theoretical the Utilising states. three the of legislature states; three essentially unifyendeavouring to foreign internal policy and the between initiative cooperative legislated trilateral was first the Baltic Entente the ideaof development the to of(1934-1940) Entente Baltic the of Estonia,contribution the explores Latvia thesis this theory, International Relations within practiced Constructivism as and Lithuania Based upon the related theoretical foundations of Mental Mapping and constituting period; particularly 1980sand the during early 1990s. the ‘Balticmovements for reestablishment the of theirnational sovereignty the Sovietduring States’. The national isof collaborative a their result perception is popular widespread thatthis consensus scholarly prevailing The War. World Second the to subsequent Union interwarduring period the (1918-1940), though they were occupied by Sovietthe routinely referred to as the ‘Baltic States’. These three republics were independent region, asdistinct together grouped Lithuania arecustomarily and Estonia, Latvia ii CEU eTD Collection solely the result of the Soviet occupation of the three republics. notion of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania constituting a particular region was not iii CEU eTD Collection encouragement. Mr.Karolis Butkevi forthcomingas Brüggemann counsel and ofTallinn was Estonia, with ever University, scenes. the behind andclassroom History Department faculty and administrative staff for their industrious work, both in the the to am grateful inI general Furthermore, candor. and criticism constructive feedback, Professordistinguished. Alfredsome way to the productionfor theirJ. of this adviceDuring the course of researchingRieberthesis, this thesis topic I am gratefula numberto of individualsand there assistance. are a number of andpeople ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWhilst who should I Professorcannot be name everyone who hasKarl contributed Hall in respectively, for their advice, ideas of the author, but not necessarily reflect the opinion of CEUBPF. Foundation, Budapest (CEUBPF). The theses explained herein are representing the own The research partially to this thesis was sponsored by Central European University thesis. this completing of andencouragement process during the Ms. Reyhan support heradvice, for to Durmaz grateful Iam also matters. Latvian of inrespect Bruveris Kristaps Mr. aswas Lithuanian, A handful of A handful individualsmention. of deserve a special Karsten Professor First andforemost Iwouldlike tothankmy supervisor andsecondreader, þ ius was an andvaluableobliging inallmatters aide Budapest, JuneBudapest, 2012 JMW iv CEU eTD Collection BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 67 APPENDIX I: CONFERENCESTHE OF BALTIC INITIATIVE, ENTNETE THE 1934-194066 CHAPTER IV: DEDUCTIONS &CONCLUSIONS...... 61 LATVIA & LITHUANIA, ...... 41 1934-1940 ESTONIA, OF MAPPING MENTAL THE ENTENTE& BALTIC THE III: CHAPTER 9813 ...... 20 1918-1934 BALTIC ROAD ENTENTE, THE THE TO II: BACKGROUND: HISTORICAL CHAPTER EIN...... 12 REGION...... ‘BALTIC’THE DECONSTRUCTING FRAMEWORK: I: THEORETICAL CHAPTER INTRODUCTION: MENTAL GEOGRAPHY & THE ‘BALTIC ...... 1 STATES’ ...... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... ii ABSTRACT Table ofContents EODR IEAUE...... 70 SECONDARY ...... LITERATURE PRIMARY 67 SOURCES...... 3.3 3.2 3.1 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.2 1.1 BALTIC ECLIPSE, 1939-1940...... 56 THE PERIOD OF STAGNATION, ...... 50 1936-1938 AN ENTHUSIASTIC BEGINNING, 1934-1936...... 42 FORGING THE BALTIC ENTENTE, 1934...... 34 THE QUADRUPLE, TRIPLE &DUAL ALLIANCES, 1920-1933...... 29 THE INITIAL ...... 23 SCENE, 1918-1920 OILCNTUTVS NITRAINLRLTOSTER...16 RELATIONS THEORY..... IN INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM MENTAL MAPPING THE FORMATIVE ...... 13 ‘BALTIC STATES’ v CEU eTD Collection where their cartographic counterparts are absent. Mindaugas Jurkynas, in his in areabsent.research Jurkynas, Mindaugas counterparts where cartographic their mental from hermeneuticthe geographies pastthrough the analysisof textual sources theoretical of approach foundConstructivism as within Relations. International the employing States’ ‘Baltic the of mapping mental the – to legislated was that – (1934-1940) firstthe political coordinated initiative of Latviaand Lithuania Estonia, Entente Baltic the as known initiative political the of contribution the examine will thesis in With mind, sources. latter andspeech acts the this textual performed through utilising mapshand-drawn by a number ofindividuals; however,mental mapping can also be mental mapping weretypically bymeans produced aggregation the of of a quantity of into studies Early live. they in which world the map mentally to collectives or individuals conscious construction of a mental geography. a distinct region, society and the surrounding Theideathat world. Estonia, Latviaand Lithuania constitute collectivelyresulting inmental geographies individuallyof how people, collectively,or conceive known as the ‘Baltic as mental to mapping; isreferred commonly orunconscious, conscious activity,whether States’, ismake devised oftheworldin towelive.This concepts in sense which constructed order such an exampleRegions of the are not naturally occurring & THE‘BALTICSTATES’ MENTALINTRODUCTION: GEOGRAPHY phenomena. Like nation-states they are socially Formation of Estonian Mental Geographies’, 1 Pärtel Piirimäe, ‘The Idea of “Yule Land”: Baltic Provinces or a Common Nordic Space? On the On Space? Nordic a Common or Provinces Baltic Land”: of “Yule Idea ‘The Piirimäe, Pärtel Constructivism offers a theoretical and methodological tool for the excavation of Broadly speaking,mental a isanimaginary geography whichisdiagram by used Baltic Worlds 1 , Vol.4, ʋ 4 (2011), p. 36. 1 CEU eTD Collection 5 Edizioni Plus – Pisa University Press, 2006), p. 116. (eds.), Beer Siegfried Amelang& 4 Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas Sovereignty’, ofLimited Idea the and League Baltic ‘The Lehti, 1999);Marko Lang, Peter &Vienna: Paris State Sovereignty inthe Aftermath of theFirst World War 3 University, 2007). Brotherhood Re-Examined the various region building projects which appeared concerning the latter named concerning thelatter various whichappeared the projects building states region background of followedEstonian, Latvianand Lithuanian history, byan examination of first treatment of the Baltic Entente initiative. Balticof Entente the treatment first by discourses of sovereignty, most notably the work of Marko Lehti.informed further is analysis The initiative. Entente Baltic the of activity of years six the eleventhe conferences foreign Estonian,the of and Latvian ministries Lithuanian during what ‘official’ rhetoric and discourse denotes, it precisely means the textual remnants of With regard to anddiscourse. rhetoric official through States’ ‘Baltic mappingthe of mental the to contribution its for examined be will initiative Entente Baltic the chapter, of of scholarship on historicthis episode. Bronius Kazlauskas’ it As is find such, states. is three between the there surprising to that a dearth somewhat agreement itpolitical firstformal was the as andtrilateral Lithuania, Latvia Estonia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuanian than in other localities. in sovereignty of issue the on placed is emphasis greater remarked, has Medijainen discussed in greater detail in the subsequent chapter. in detail in discussed subsequent the greater hasbrotherhood’, such utilised a theoretical and methodological shall be approach which ‘Baltic it heterms as or unity, Lithuanian and Latvian Estonian, of notions into Studies 2 Bronius Kazlauskas, Bronius Eero Medijainen, ‘The Baltic Question in the Twentieth Century: Historiographic Aspects’, in James S. Marko Lehti, Marko Mindaugas Jurkynas, ‘Brotherhood Reconsidered: Region-Building in the Baltics’, , Vol. 35, The Baltic Entente represented a new phase in the history of the republics of of republics history the the anew in phase represented Entente The Baltic A Baltic League asa Construct of theNew Europe: Envisioning a Baltic Region and Small ʋ 1 (2004), pp. 1-31; Mindaugas Jurkynas, L’Entente Baltique (Vilnius: Institute of International Relations and Political Science, Vilnius Public Power inEurope: Studies in Historical Transformations , NeueFolge, Bd.45, H.3 (1997), pp. 450-465. (Paris:Librairie du RecueilSirey, 1939). 5 The publication offers acomprehensive (Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, New York, How Deep is Your Love? The Baltic 4 2 More specifically, in the third in the specifically, More L’Entente Baltique L’Entente Journal of Baltic 3 As Eero was the was (Pisa: 2 CEU eTD Collection University 1978),Press, pp. 126-135, notes:217-219. (eds.), 8 Stockholmiensia, 3 (Stockholm: Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, 1988), p. 92. Loit(eds.), 7 PA: Euramerica Press, 1976). inconferences total,Kazlauskas’ eleven Although were there and place1939. 1934 between thattook conferences Entente thenineBaltic Kazlauskas analyses century. twentieth the decades of first during the 6 career in following War.career Second World United the the States name Kazlauskas contracted J. Kaslas; Bronis adoptingan the used pursuing of academic The BalticNations:Quest forRegionalIntegration and Political Unity taking A edition place. revised and updated of work was publishedthis in 1976, entitled eleventh conference in1940,andwas being whilstwritten presumably tenthwas the treatment of the political initiative. political the of treatment dedicated no was there Reality?’ or Phantom Entente: ‘The Baltic 1978 Anderson’s as between 1976publicationbe atwork Kazlauskas’ directed latter’s appear to and the Entente.” Baltic the studying scholars by overlooked been “have 1941, doesnot include the tenth and eleventh conference. including into an enquiry whathappened in Latvia Estonia, Lithuania and between 1939- favourable and optimisticlight. Nevertheless, 1976edition, theupdated although was towards well Balticthe disposed initiative, Entente viewing in their endeavours a Reality?’ is merely a work, succinct surveying the general throughouttrends theperiod of or ‘Phantom cooperation. of level effective an developed have may Lithuania and Latvia the Baltic Entente, viewing it as a link in a chain of twenty wasted years wherein Estonia, Edgar Anderson, ‘The Baltic Entente: Phantom or Reality?’, in V. Stanley Vardys & Romauld J. Misiunas Edgar Anderson, ‘The Baltic Entente, 1914-1940: Its Strength& Weakness’, in John Hiden & Aleksander Bronis J.Kaslas, Bronis The Baltic States in Peace and War and Peace in States Baltic The The latter led Edgar Anderson to remark that the tenth and eleventh conferences and eleventh remark tenth the that to Anderson led The latter Edgar The Baltic States in International Relations between the Two Wars Two the between Relations International in States Baltic The The Baltic Nations: The Quest for Regional Integration and Political Liberty L’Entente BaltiqueL’Entente 8 (University Park, PA & London: The Pennsylvania State Nevertheless, Anderson is somewhat more critical moreof critical is Anderson somewhat Nevertheless, was inbeforepublished 1939, the 6 On the whole, Kazlauskas , Studia Baltica 7 This would utterance (Pittston, , with 3 CEU eTD Collection of International Affairs, 1994). has expressed, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania “are not the Baltic States with ‘S’, Baltic a capital the States not “are andLithuania Latvia Estonia, expressed, has Kasekamp AsAndres states. three the collectively designate to ‘Baltic States’ term the abound amongst scholars of the field of ‘Baltic Studies’ in general. The problem is use of vocabularies inaccurate Moreover, period. time during this states three these of histories as Anderson did; itbrandingas acooperative thatonly endeavour paper. existed on viewendeavour, a pessimistic of trilateral the Estonia,adopt andLithuania. They Latvia Stranga to the policies of Europe’s major powers and the diverging foreign policies of studies they a adopt thematic approach. Adeal great of isattention paidby Feldmanis and led to the establishment of the Baltic Entente, however, unlike the previous chronological that circumstances the examine Stranga and Feldmanis works, abovementioned the Like in the form a concise manuscript entitled manuscript a concise in form the Latvian Institute of International Affairs, written by InesisFeldmanis and Aivars Stranga, initiativeEntente expounded byKazlauskas. appraisal primary of sources shatters image amiablethe of of endeavours Balticthe moreover, comprehensive; nevertheless though condensed is account The provided. however,infor time thefirst survives an is of this work, eleven all conferences account and Weakness’. expandedof account workin this form the 1914-1940:ItsStrength ‘Theof Baltic Entente provides an Anderson likeKazlauskas, much years later, initiative.the ten However, 10 9 Anderson, ‘Strength& Weakness’, pp. 79-99. Inesis Feldmanis & Aivars Stranga, &Aivars Feldmanis Inesis As a footnote, all of these authors use an inaccurate vocabulary in narrating the narrating in vocabulary inaccurate an use authors these all of footnote, a As The most recent dedicated study of the Baltic Entente was produced bythe wasproduced Entente Baltic the of study dedicated recent The most 9 Anderson’s lamenting of the lost possibilities of the Baltic Entente Baltic the of possibilities lost the of lamenting Anderson’s The Destiny of theBaltic Entente, 1934-1940 The Destiny of the Baltic Entente,1934-1940 the Baltic of The Destiny (Riga: Latvian Institute . 10 4 CEU eTD Collection presently become apparent, the long-handed formulationwill of ‘Estonia, that Latvia and Lithuania’ reasons will for be used. however, instances most In entity. political coherent a as perceived being Lithuania and Latvia ofEstonia, instances discussing when beemployed shall States’ ‘Baltic manner: following Forthe purpose of convenience, this work will exploit this discrepancy of capitalisation distinctions in the 13 Vol.4, 12 peculiar because of butthe historian of the interests changing orthe newdocuments of historical just events alwayswill andmust be not reconceived becauseof unearthing the discussing geographical that locality. popular usage, into fallen has it once which asregion, a perceived of in mapping mental the of theexample instancea prominent is ofenquiry, in this later thedemonstrated is as This, unit. ‘Balticpolitical coherent States’, is difficult formedEstonia, a and Lithuania Latvia before waseventheperception there that to circumvent tool isas anarrative – employed matter ‘Baltic states’ forthat –or States’ term ‘Baltic when do not address the problem of the retroactive usage of the designation. In other words, the states’. asthe‘Baltic designated is by increasingly be‘Baltic term States’ denoted i.e.used tothe what lowercase, now are uppercase in written traditionally terms many such as usage; language English as in the United States”. United as inthe 11 Sea”. Lithuania” whilst the “second could theoreticallydenote statesthe thaton border Balticthe semantics, rather than lexicographic definitions. first The term denotes Estonia,Latvia, and empirical of historical, in terms concepts, different two represent used, traditionally been have “ that noting states’, ‘Baltic and States’ ‘Baltic terms the between distinction the orthographicnaturehas of Kristian on Gerner commented problematic conventions. the Kasekamp, Kristian Gerner, ‘The Baltic States – How Many?: A Story of a Historical Coincidence’, Historical a of A Story How Many?: – States Baltic ‘The Gerner, Kristian Andres Kasekamp, Andres 12 ʋ Furthermore, As David Weberman hasit is remarked, incontrovertible that “descriptions of past 4 (2011), p. 52. A History of the Baltic States A History of the Baltic States conventions for the capitalisation of the term have been shifting in shifting been have of term the capitalisation the for conventions 11 The situation becomes more complicated whenconsidering more complicated becomes The situation 13 Nevertheless, discussions of capitalisation conventions capitalisation of discussions Nevertheless, , p. 54. (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), p. viii. Baltic Worlds as they , 5 CEU eTD Collection 16 University Press,1999), Ch. 2,‘The Origins and Meaning of Termthe ‘Baltic’, pp. 6-12. present day terminology of Latvians and Lithuanians for the Baltic Sea, Baltic the for Lithuanians and Latvians of terminology day present Bojtár, 15 (1997), pp. 749-750. words for ‘white’; Balticum term belief the erroneous but widespread is “arather it, describes Endre Bojtár has other whilsteasily by beenshrouded first, the as of refuted The passing the time. is itself, one theword of origin the regarding theories prevalent two There are word. the of usage of the occurrence primary the been have is to presumed Sea and from Baltic the ethnic. and linguistic/philological political, is ‘Baltic’. This raises the question of what exactly is ‘Baltic’. adjective identity; the collective a discernible region with aparticular constitute Lithuania in isan thisand republics concept The of that Latvia case the adjective. Estonia, distinguish itfrom its original or later version, typically through the introduction or use of comparable to a retronym, is neologism, atype of states three of naming the This retroactive States’. ‘Baltic wherein a new name Estonia, Latviaand the convention Lithuania: of retroactively designatingthe them is ascribed to an object republics the in of to relation has affair occurred kindof A similar Roman Empire. or concept to the branch of eastern the to historians of ascription a later was Empire’ ‘Byzantine term the that is well-know it example For entities. and episodes which wedesignate narrative structure of historical ofhistorical understanding.” structure narrative 14 Ibid, p.Ibid, 6;Kasekamp, For a thorough discussion of the four distinctions of the term ‘Baltic’ in the English language see Endre see language English the in ‘Baltic’ term ofthe distinctions four of the discussion a thorough For David Weberman, ‘The Nonfixity of the Historical Past’, Foreword tothe Past: A Cultural History of the Baltic People ‘Baltic’ has principally fouryet distinctintersecting meanings: geographic, ,” or rather‘Baltic,” isor from Sea’ Latvian derived andLithuanian directly the Balts A History of the Baltic States and Baltas , respectively. , p. viii. 15 The geographical variant directly stems directly variant geographical The 14 The same can be said for the names by The Review of Metaphysics 16 Bojtár convincingly that the argues (Budapest:Central European , Vol. 50, Baltijas j ʋ nj 4 ra mare and 6 CEU eTD Collection 19 (Greenwood Press, 2003), p. 1. 362; Kasekamp, Vol. 10, Estonia’:Re-regionalising Estonian Identity’, 18 Lithuania. in a region (Žemaitia) latter the and a town former the Sea’; ‘Žemaitian the and Sea’ ‘Palanga the both as Sea Baltic the to referred to have appear Lithuanians In turn, Riga. of Gulf the e.g. Sea’, ‘Little the to contrast in Sea’ ‘Great it the called Latvians The Finns. the over hegemony ontheir west. The general consensus located being it as despite to this Sea’ ‘East curiosity the Sea as Baltic the is to that it is referred accounted commonly Finns the for of note, by a point As the period of Swedish Kasekamp, North Eastern EuropeHistorical as a Region’, acquisition of acquisition connotations. political of principal survivors. notes Nevertheless, Bojtár that it took a while forNesselmann’s calledEuropean Indo familylanguages, of which of Latvian and Lithuanian are the erläutert Überresten it(1811-1891) introduced in his workentitled Nesselmann F. H. Georg scholar German the when studies, linguistic and philological German nobles in Livonia began to identify themselves as themselves identify to began in Livonia nobles German became widelyused, to in particularly the secondhalfof nineteenth century the when in order to describe the body of water stretching across the land as though it were a belt. etc. Sea, Sea, West East i.e. inhabitants littoral of it, proximity Sea’s inof Baltic the their geographic to respect achieves this a discussion through pre-twentieth the of century naming of conventions Baltijos j 17 from the Danish word geographicthe forbe Baltic the distinction derived is to Sea bythe assumed chronicler theory, this In Bremen. of Adam chronicler century eleventh the of invention linguistic Piirimäe, ‘The Idea of “Yule Land”’, p.38. Land”’, of“Yule Idea ‘The Piirimäe, Bojtár, Bojtár, ʋ Although the geographical term it suffused,Although gradually geographical the ‘Baltic Sea’ term was somewhat Foreword tothe Past Foreword tothe Past nj 2 (2003), p. 349; Hackmann & Schweitzer, ‘North Eastern Europe as a Historical Region’, p. A History of the Baltic States ra respectively, are late-learned foreign borrowings from He from languages. borrowings foreign respectively, foreign late-learned are A History of the Baltic States (Berlin: G Reimer, 1845) to designate a distinct branch of the so- bælte 17 , p. 9; Karsten Brüggemann, ‘Leaving the ‘Baltic’ States and ‘Welcome to ‘Welcome and States ‘Baltic’ the ‘Leaving Brüggemann, Karsten 9; , p. , pp. 6-7, The second theory is that the word ‘Baltic’ is attributed to a (belt), an early loanword from the Latin n , p. viii. . 3. See also Jörg Hackmann & Robert Schweitzer, ‘Introduction: 19 , p., viii; Kevin O’Connor, European Review of History – Revue européenne d’Histoire Journal of Baltic Studies Simultaneously, the term ‘Baltic’ was utilised in utilised was ‘Baltic’ term the Simultaneously, Die Sprache der alten Preussen inihren baltische , Vol. 33, The History of the Baltic States ʋ ; heralding the word’s balteus 4 (2002), p. 362; , conjured up , conjured 18 , 7 CEU eTD Collection 1997), p.152. Similarly, Russophonethe term States in a Turbulent Environment: The Baltic Perspective Leji ‘North Eastern Europe as a Historical Region’, p. 362; Kasekamp, Brüggemann, ‘Leaving the ‘Baltic’ States and ‘WelcomeSee toEstonia’’, enquiry. p.350; Hackmann this & Schweitzer,within focal not are they although sphere, cultural German the to peculiar connotations 22 21 indicates Baltic Germans. Baltic indicates Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania asindependentrepublics in the early ittwentieth century, Provinces of Estland, Livland andKurland,in and e.g.beforeanother, emergencethe of denotes Estonians and Latvians as theformerinhabitants of Imperial Russia’s Baltic ‘Baltic’ designates Latvians and Lithuanians. Meanwhile, in a particular historic usage it exampleFor –in terms Estonians, Latvians andLithuanians – in a linguistic sense, meaningthe of meanings of one three previously the context. described on the depending forgotten widespread mental geography interwar period.the of with Finland and Poland was discarded. formersupplanted the followingWorld the usage,although, War, association the Second The latter in the present day represents century of twentieth earlier the connotation political This alternate and Poland. a nearly ‘Baltic’ signified Baltic Germans ( Germans Baltic signified ‘Baltic’ century. twentieth early the into survived Lithuanian or Latvian either as branch this innovation to be adopted and the earlier convention of designating all of the languages of 20 inhabitants. political meaning,denoting the republics of LatviaandEstonia, Lithuania andtheir acontrasting gained ‘Baltic’ negotiations, peace aforementioned the During region. Ibid. As KarstenBrüggemann observes, and to complicate matters, the p.38. term Land”’, ‘Baltic’ of“Yule Idea ‘The has its Piirimäe, own Bojtár, Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity: Chimera or Reality?’, in Atis Leji Atis in orReality?’, Chimera Unity: Baltic for Quest š, ‘The Finally, the so-called ethnic sense of the term fluid,Finally,is so-called most the term sensethe of acquiring perhaps ethnic the Up until the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, the political nuance of theterm of nuance political the 1919, of PeaceConference Up until Paris the Foreword tothe Past 21 Attimes, 1920sand the throughout term the indicated 1930s, Finland also , pp. 10-11; Kasekamp, 22 In the present day, a geo-political variant of so-called the of variant day, ageo-political Inthepresent Deutschbalten pribaltika A History of the Baltic States Baltic the of History A has has its ownparticular nuances historical meanings. (Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, ), excluding all other inhabitants of the of inhabitants other all excluding ), A History of the Baltic States Ƽ š & Žaneta Ozoli š &Žaneta , p. xi. Ƽ a (eds.), , p. xi; Atis Small 20 8 CEU eTD Collection between Lithuania. between Estonia, Latvia and in usheringrelationship the anewphaseinthe of history Entente, so-called Baltic Good Understanding andCo-operation agreement between the three states until until states three between the 1934. agreement trilateral political formal no was there year, following the Russia Soviet with negotiations jure positions at the Paris Peace Conference and ajointappeal to the League of Nations for 25 24 states.” as Baltic the known becommonly today would countries three the that preordained states from republics Lithuaniaindependent –Estonia, separate 1918 three –emergedas Latviaand in say that to suffice will it the point this At configurations. ‘Baltic’ possible of proliferation ruins of Estonia,denote Latvia Lithuania and during dueto is thisperiod inaccurate the the Russian to States’ ‘Baltic term the useof the demonstrating that chapter, second in the elucidated Empire.during theearlyinterwar The history period. from of threethe states 1918 until 1934is As Kasekamp nations. latter notes,and Lithuania. For example, Baltic peoples, languages, states, etc., refer allto three of the “[i]t typically indicate related republicsthings those to the or whichareof of LatviaEstonia, was synonyms various its and ‘Baltic’ usage. in everyday isdominant not term the of sense ethnic 23 manner as a narrative tool. the Anglophone world. Furthermore, of that with in analogous all is languages languages all thein term States’ is retroactively ‘Baltic term ofthe employedusage inthe samecontemporary the Nevertheless, Edgar Anderson, ‘Toward the Baltic Union, 1927-1934’, Jurkynas, ‘Brotherhood Reconsidered’, pp.6-7. Kasekamp, recognition in 1919, and an (unobserved) agreement to embark in inagreementto jointly recognition peace an(unobserved) 1919,and 23 The term isThe term for Estonia, States’ Latvia‘Baltic denoting inaccurate andLithuania Although there are a number of precedents, such as the coordinating of their of coordinating as the such precedents, of anumber thereare Although A History of the Baltic States , p. viii. 25 of 12 Nevertheless, even at this historic juncture in juncture historic this at even Nevertheless, th 24 September 1934, which inaugurated the inaugurated 1934,which September The latter agreement was the Lituanus , Vol.13, ʋ 1 (1967), p. 26. Treaty of de 9 CEU eTD Collection latter southern neighbour. history with the former northern neighbour and apparent linguistic and so-called ethnic affinity with the most noteworthy in this matter, sandwiched betweenEstonia and Lithuania; sharing a common medieval which may yield much information on the relationships and perceptions betweenthe three nations. Latvia is written in texts, particularly are states three by the which in indigenous order and The émigré first. state ownindividuals, their presenting is each hitherto uncharted scholarly (Lithuania-Latvia-Estonia); territory alphabetical order. On the other hand, Lithuanians tend to opt forlisting the statesappear from to gravitate south to towards northnaming Estonians them one hand, fromthe on northexample, to southFor (Estonia-Latvia-Lithuania), notable. is written are states the which coincidently,in order the in however, the name of the state they are affiliated withfirst. This is not a matterof concern within this thesis, perceivable substitute the ‘Baltic States’, ascribing no particular importance to any of them. To date, there is a Within this thesis the order in which the three states are written isconsistently alphabetically, when used to 26 consensus that these three states came to be perceived as a distinct entity subsequent to subsequent entity adistinct as be perceived came to states three these that consensus address the prevailingacademic seeks to this enquiry States’ ‘Baltic mappingthe of ‘Baltic states’, or “the lazy shorthand ‘Baltics’, patterned after the ‘Balkans’.” long-handed use of ‘Estonia, Latvia in Lithuania’, and forsubstitution ‘Baltic the States’, inof naming,‘Baltic most respectpart,thissimply entails term the For the States’. within the narrative of this vocabulary the mental utilised andLithuania.mapping Estonia,the Moreover, of Latvia thesis the aims to initiative Entente Baltic to the of contendcontribution the of that alongside presented be will with this phenomenon of retroactive final the of thesis, isanalysis the of throughout which thisdevelopmenttraced perception The nations. three between the of commonality perceptions Sea and of Baltic the littoral mappingmental eastern of the totheissueof the itis inherently related research, denote republicsthe of LatviaandEstonia, Lithuania central isnotthe issue of this Finland and Poland. interwar the designation period as at‘Baltic’a state fluctuated, of times incorporating the three states’ histories itis difficult to develop a codified vocabulary. Throughout the Kasekamp, In examining the contribution of the Baltic Entente initiative to the early mental early the to initiative Entente Baltic the of contribution the examining In Whilst this phenomenon of retroactive use of the expression ‘Baltic States’ to tendency A History of the Baltic States within written works, particularly by Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians, to present to Lithuanians, and Latvians by Estonians, particularly works, written within , p. viii. 26 per per se 10 ; CEU eTD Collection of of usingan reconstruct such approach to pastmental other geographies. International the ithoped thatthisis Relations willdemonstrate potential enquiry theory, utilising the theoretical methodological of and tools Constructivism, asfound within conclusionthe SecondWorldthe of War, duringtheSoviet period. Furthermore, by 11 CEU eTD Collection Vol.4, 27 Germany, and Denmark – four states that are no [considered] ‘Baltic’ in theleast.” ‘Baltic’ are no [considered] that four states Denmark – Germany, and bordered on WorldWar“[b]efore only Balticthe I, four Sea:Sweden,Russia, states togetherunder beenFurthermore, asKristian ‘Baltic’.notes, the grouped term Gerner that have Estonia,and Lithuania is Latvia it only in day, thepresent Sweden. However, sharinglittoral: and Poland, Russia Finland, Germany, states Denmark, other the Baltic literature under the in are often treated that states adjacent three of combining the to itrelates as diplomacy single rubric of the ‘Baltic States’. At first Relations. of in International as practiced discipline the glance, there are social the later construction isreality or of somewhat during Constructivism, the 1980s, many emerged which approach, theoretical second space. The imagining of geographical foundations. The first, dating from 1960s,isthe mental mapping which concerns the theoretical related two upon rests States’ ‘Baltic of the concept the into This enquiry REGION ‘BALTIC’ THE DECONSTRUCTING FRAMEWORK: THEORETICAL I: CHAPTER early twentieth century the political rhetoric and discourse of eleven conferences of of discourse the conferences of eleven early rhetoric century and political the twentieth it? employed who those raises suchashowdid questions develop discourse didserve this whatpurpose it and Kristian Gerner, ‘The Baltic States – How Many?: A Story of a Historical Coincidence’, Historical a of A Story How Many?: – States Baltic ‘The Gerner, Kristian ʋ The usefulness of these theoretical approaches lies in their interpreting of interpreting in their lies approaches theoretical these of usefulness The In order to examine the mental inexamineLatvia mental themappingIn to Estonia, and the Lithuania of order 4 (2011), p. 52. Baltic Worlds 27 This , 12 CEU eTD Collection Formation of Estonian Mental Geographies’, 29 28 Image ofthe City into Mental Mapping were performed in byKevin the 1960s innotably Lynch, his inform perspectiveofInternational Constructivist the Relations Thefirststudiestheory. upon the principle tenets of the sociological theory of Constructivism andhow they focus excavation will this theoretical thisenquiry, of scope andbeyond superfluous the As a debatesdiscussion thorough multifaceted the isof concerning constructivism MENTAL MAPPING THE FORMATIVE ‘BALTIC STATES’ 1.1 entity rather period. during the area, or asaunifiedandcoherent were and depicted Lithuania Latvia which Estonia, remnants of the Baltic Ententeinitiative will be examined in order to address the extent to the textual of Latvia Lithuania, and Estonia, emerged the Soviet occupation States’ after ‘Baltic the of idea the that consensus the testing of idea the with began research this activities in order to view how the three states were mental mapped during the period. As words, inother interactionsthe makers be terms of policy will examined of cooperative enquiry. In present the of template forming the be will initiative analysed, Baltic Entente smallest locality to the entire world and everything in between. environment that canbe mentally mapped, butalso large expansesrangingfrom the movement that scholarly a short-lived to whichgaverise geography asui-generiscalled urban construct for the ‘mental mapping of the world’. It is not just the urban Pärtel Piirimäe, ‘The Idea of “Yule Land”: Baltic Provinces or a Common Nordic Space? On the On Space? Nordic a Common or Provinces Baltic Land”: of “Yule Idea ‘The Piirimäe, Pärtel Kevin Lynch, Kevin The Image of the City , a classic work of spatial perception. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1960). Baltic Worlds , Vol.4, 28 Lynch demonstrated how people Lynchdemonstrated ʋ 4 (2011), p. 36. 29 The 13 CEU eTD Collection (London: Routledge,2002), ‘Appendix: The Constructionof Mental Maps’,pp. 157-164. 30 position within world. the this investigation usedwill utilise words the bypolicy makers tomentally map their period, interwar the of maps hand-drawn of absence in the Therefore, with. themselves align they that people the and belong they that places the world, the view they how with as a set of directions. With their words peopledescribe anindividual collectiveor point-of-view of world.the can depict vast expansesmapping’, and terminology,is sense; withinrelated broader ina used thisthesis to in accordance ‘mental Therefore, beneeds navigated. to that space physical of mental map the gives another a maps can alsoset be depicted through words. A ofsimple example woulddirections be if one person mental idea that isthe with prepared thesis this However, spaces. physical navigate to from one point to another;locality temporal that mustduring beperiod sought. they effectively an concerningmethod States’ of interwar ‘Baltic the alternative analysing this period create a it is that of the subjects’. imagination mental resulting ofthe researcher’s the other, mapmuch the product as isas andemphasise elements uncommon removecertain may needto the researcher maps. As aggregation finaland map the whichelements are are found incommon theindividual by analysed mapsareusually simple tothefinal map. depictions Subjects’ will contribute cartographic mental subjects’ mapnumber a of a ofconstructing andin maps, course the For informationon the constructionof mental maps see Peter Gould & Rodney White, People do not only verbally create such basic (and often temporary) mental maps mental temporary) often (and basic such create verbally only not do People Mental maps are traditionally thought of as imaginary diagrams which people use This conventional type of mental mapping requires subjects to draw colour mental or This mapping subjectsto of conventional requires type 30 However, as there are no such hand drawn maps from the Mental Maps 14 CEU eTD Collection 1940] (Vilnius: Lietuvos istorijos institutas, Vilniaus universitetas,2008). vienyb 33 32 is athand thisresearch task project for as the aresuitable Lithuanian translations aspects of linguisticAs such, publication the lends itself better to theresearch of political history as particular and textual analysistranslation, without recourse forare the reader to the original language of the documentation.unable to be performed. inLithuanian volume allreproduced of are this sources drawbacks. Thetextual Nevertheless,itswithout is not whilstconvenient, volume, a single within sources publication these of the Idea and Practice of the Unity of the Baltic States, 1918-1940]. the the States, Idea andBaltic of Unity Practice 31 manifest together inmanifesttogether andidentity,reality: meaning. structure a volume entitled, a volume considerably easier bythe publication of sources by Lithuanian the in Institute of History observer(s) viewsthemselvesashaving of some sort relationship this to construction. andthe emotional reasons or for practical in way either some arelinked together subjects in addition to their own relationship to these constructs. mental andpatterns, constructed their subjects practical individual the emotional – of or Finally,is the thirdelement meaning the ascribing of by – either observer(s) the identified. are observer(s) the the between subjectsand spatial discernable patterns second In and Lithuania. the Latvia areEstonia, subjects casethe the this enquiry of commonality. areidentified,subjects into individuality opposed the rather sense of as In Zenonas Butkus, Zenonas Ibid. Lynch, ơ s id Lynch asserts that mental maps are constructed from three components that are Fortunately, the locating of primary sources for this wasmade for this enterprise sources primary of locating Fortunately, the The Imageof the City ơ ja irpraktika 1918-1940 metais ý eslovas Laurinavi Baltijos valstybi , p. 8. þ ius, Rimantas Miknys & VytasŽalys (eds.), Miknys& VytasŽalys Rimantas ius, ǐ [The Idea and Practice of the Unity of the Baltic States: 1918- States: Baltic the of Unity of the Practice and Idea [The vienyb ơ s id ơ ja irpraktika 1918-1940metais 32 Inotherwords,individual 31 In the first component first the In Baltijos valstybi 33 However, the However, ǐ [The 15 CEU eTD Collection of International Relations and Political Science, Vilnius University, 2007), p. 36-41. 35 Knowledge 34 realities is a continuous process. As Berger and Luckmann assert, “new ideas may may appear “newideas assert, Luckmann AsBergerand process. is continuous a realities perpetually. perception, common of new realities of any and people, accommodated amongst reintegrate group they given are heuristically membersof ideas of agreementreality, root such that appearnon-arbitrary. Once take in mutual agreement. distinctAny region. such concept ornotion appears where an majority overwhelming are mental such as notion, or the Lithuania Latviaand geography Estonia, a of constituting phenomenon may which appear natural obvious isinor socially actuality constructed, world.” them as acoherent meaningful to by andsubjectively men “ainterpreted it, reality Luckmann Berger anddescribe Thomas L. asPeter words, other reality. In that of construction social a develop communication, intersubjective rather or reality, a similar experiencing others with communicating individuals. Individuals perceive of therealities lifeeveryday subjectively, which through interaction of groups of through the maintained and is social the created that reality The basis of the theory of knowledge known as social constructivism within sociology is THEORY SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1.2 material. of the features linguistic specific asto opposed states three the between relationship the of representation holistic the with principally concerned Mindaugas Jurkynas, Peter L. Berger & Thomas Luckmann, & Thomas Berger L. Peter The latter notwithstanding, perceptions of a social reality, created through the through created a reality, social of notwithstanding, perceptions The latter (New York, NY: Anchor Books, 1967), p. 19. How Deep isYour Love? The Baltic Brotherhood Re-Examined TheSocial Construction of Reality: ATreatise in theSociology of 34 Therefore, under the latter premise, a latter under the Therefore, 35 That is say,to the construction newof (Vilnius: Institute 16 CEU eTD Collection 39 38 37 36 of human minds and one of a perceived social exists environment that because ofit. determines this asbeingdistinction betweena physical reality which exists independently objective reality, orrather, reality independent of mutual social agreement. John R. Searle whatis already unproblematic”, attempting to establish or re-establish social order. into sector problematic the integrate to lifeseeks everyday of “the reality that depicts alliance aBaltic of establishment the concerning relations diplomatic Hectic realities. and changing is reconstruction reality social of to adjustment astructural objective that interwar construction unionyearsthe of a ‘Balticduring the League’or demonstrate communication. counterpart; the shared perception ofacollective. sharedperception the counterpart; is of lifethere everyday perception the asocietal of a personal conceptualisation present.” my of ‘now’ the and body my of ‘here’ the around Or, asBerger and Luckmann it, reality “the would have of lifeiseveryday organized life. human of reality the alter mind human the by captured experiences commonplace withinconceptualised, structured withinand temporal spatial coordinates, which even is held. As reality such, already innotions of multitude the accommodation requires new phenomenon that of a social beginswith appearance the of reality construction hand.” at existing phenomenon empirical the explain adequately longer no ones old the when Ibid, p.Ibid, 36. R. Searle, John p.Ibid, 38. Berger & Luckmann, 36 Nevertheless, there is a difference between socially constructed reality reality and constructed socially between is a difference there Nevertheless, hypothetical configurations various with the whichdeals chapter The subsequent Innately they develop as a means of convenience for the purpose for of purpose the convenience means Innately developof asa they The Social Construction of Reality The Social Construction of Reality (New York, NY: Free Press, 1995), p. 2. , p. 200. 39 Whilst this is effectively this Whilst 37 38 The 17 CEU eTD Collection International Relations 40 Constructivism emerged in International Relations theory in a“middle theory Relations between as Constructivism ground” emerged International remarksthat Jurkynas Mindaugas enquiry. for the serve not anyparticularpurpose does 1980s.the Recounting the through process which itdeveloped willbe hereomitted asit primarily of social facts, which are only by human agreement.” consist Relations International that believes “constructivism asserts, Adler Emanuel Relations: as social isorder a product of isMan it inherently a social Asconstruct. is a of product Man; wherein find thelinkwe Constructivismto the International of ofthings social order the Therefore becomecommon perception. and widespread of one and as such have to be made the best of. limitations, language,informs, various its isall communicate with, humanshaveto that socially undeterminable) sharedknowledge.(although its perceivable Despite altogether isand communalthe route which the through of into conceived a concept arrives pot they communicateis mean is conveyingwhat Nonetheless,this to precisely. successfully someone if determine to possible not is it as intersubjective inherently is communication bag commonall terms and expressions, of from considerable) words, (albeita limited be selected need to Aswords a form of communication. into perceptions and experiences mutually meanings.language people vehicleof the Through their to areable adjust with languages, madeup common words of andwritten i.e.verbal communicating, means of needa humans with another one tointeract in order Nevertheless, differently. Emanuel Adler, ‘Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism inWorld Politics’, Social Constructivism in International developedRelations course the during of reality to or fact, social particular for any isrequired a consensus Ultimately, liveHumans is inasharedtemporal and world, experience which perceive , Vol. 3, ʋ 3 (1997), p. 323. 40 European Journal of 18 CEU eTD Collection 45 (Oslo: NUPI, ResearchReport, 2002), p. 15. 44 43 42 41 of both approaches. both of Rationalistthe thediscipline; andReflectivist paradigms dominated that taking the best the ontological notion of reality’s intersubjectivity with Reflectivism. with intersubjectivity reality’s of notion ontological the and Rationalism with reality of analysis objective the of understanding epistemological the share meanwhile Constructivists analysed. objectively be cannot it that therefore and intersubjective is reality that hold Reflectivists analysed, beobjectively can reality of political speech acts and determine the presence of the notion of the ‘Baltic States’. discourse analysis, as utilised by Jurkynas,in order to examine the intersubjective content of approach hermeneutic the necessitates therefore latter The dichotomy. ‘They’ and regions conceptualises the employment of terminology, with particular focus on the ‘We’As such, invention the and reinvention of geography is a political and act, the study of commodity. aconsiderable all is after territory as tools, political as utilised inevitably are perspective they existenceinto of they inscribed through perspective acts speech. are physical reality and is socially emergent.” it. the temporal perceives notes, world AsAdler “isnotof entirely by determined the reality about is known what in that idea the with whichaccord in are Relations International of fields wethe live derives predominantlyhuman minds and that of one which because ofit.exists Nevertheless,in Constructivists from what societyof exists independent that reality physical the of above, idea,outlined Searle’s reflecting knows, or rather Jurkynas, IverB. Neumann, Adler, ‘Seizing the Middle Ground’, p. 324. p.Ibid, 26. Jurkynas, With regard to a ‘region’,With regard to such the‘Balticas from States’, a Constructivist How Deep isYour Love? How Deep isYour Love? Regions in International Relations Theory: the Case for a Region-Building Approach 41 Whilst Rationalists are concerned with material factors bywhich factors material concerned with Whilstare Rationalists , pp. 43-46. , pp. 25-26. 43 44 These speech acts Thesespeech 42 Directly 45 19 CEU eTD Collection Baltic States: The Years of Independence, 1917-1940 Pusta Configuration of American Diplomacy’, in Jüri G. Poska (ed.) of International Affairs, 1994), pp. 12-13; Malbone W. Graham, ‘The Recognitionof StatesBaltic in the thrown directlythrown intowars ofindependence against commonthree antagonists; namely the territorial with disputes Poland which presently.will be delineated delayedby full was ofNationsin1921,Lithuania’s membersrecognition of League the powers of Britain, France and the United States. 47 for Estonia Latvia, and and 1922for Lithuania with the recognition by of Union states in Sovietthe three the 1920andwasonlyresolved in1921 and Lithuania interms of international garnering Thisrecognition. process began with the indivisible Russian re-emergingstate from turmoil the Bolshevikthe of Revolution. Vol.20, children.”less unwanted respectively. Edgar Anderson has remarked that they came “into this world as more or 46 independences during 1918 on independences1918 on 23 during Firstthe WorldWar Bolshevikthe Revolution 1917; declaring and theirof The republics of Latvia Estonia, Lithuania and wereestablishedin the chaotic wake of 1918-1934 ENTENTE, BALTIC CHAPTER II: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND:THE ROADTOTHE Inesis Feldmanis & Aivars Stranga, &Aivars Feldmanis Inesis Edgar Anderson, ‘Military Policies and Plans of the Baltic States on the Eve of World War II’, (Stockholm: Publications du Comité des amis de K.R. Pusta, 1965), p. 145; Georg vonRauch, ʋ In 1918, the newly declared states In firmly(without newly borders)1918, the were declared states established This was only beginningof the independence for struggle the of Latvia Estonia, 2(1974), online at http://www.lituanus.org/1974/74_2_02.htm, retrieved 14 46 The victorious Entente powers had harboured hopes of The victorious powershad hopes Entente harboured an of The Destiny of theBaltic Entente, 1934-1940 rd February,18 (London: C. Hurst & Co., 1974), pp. 81,103. 47 Although all three states had become had states three all Although Pro Baltica: Mélanges dédiés à Kaarel R. th November, and 16 November, and de jure de recognition of the Entente (Riga: Latvian Institute th April 2011. th February, Lituanus The 20 , CEU eTD Collection Affairs, 1997), p. 154. Small States in a Turbulent Environment: The Baltic Perspective 50 Security in Europe afterWorld War I’,pp. 8-21. 49 Journal of Riga Technical University something thatcould havebeen fortaken granted.” that the idea of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania constituting the ‘Baltic States’ “was not Leji Atis as illustrating, any at time; one underconsideration configurations state-cluster hypothetical of aproliferation therewas Overall century. early twentieth littoral Balticthe of Seathrough which Estonia, LatviaandLithuania passed duringthe sovereignty. national their preserve to in attempt an states with other projects federative collaborative and seeking out through protect independenceinclinedsuch, Estonia,Latviahard-won their were Lithuania to and As littoral. eastern Sea’s Baltic the on territories strategic their geographically coveted hulking neighbours –Weimar Germany and Soviet the Union – whohad historically one of them did not have the potential military strength to ward of either of their two cooperative and federative projects in safeguardfederative theirorder sovereignty. to andprojects cooperative seek out War,Lithuania werepropelled to Worldafter First Latvia andthe Estonia, nations. emerging from maelstrom this as recognised members of international the community of succeeded in three states the independence, years during of early the states fledgling between three the disputes territorial included assailed them, which that adversities 48 Bolsheviks, or rather Red Army, the German Atis Leji &Stranga, SeeFeldmanis -Ɨ nis Stradi This chapter recounts concerning the eastern recounts federative procession projects the This chapter of 48 Ƽ As three small states within the Versailles system of security which emerged š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity: Chimera or Reality?’, in Atis Leji Ƽ š, ‘Beginnings of Intellectual the Entente of the StatesBaltic (1920-1935-1940)’, The Destiny of the Baltic Entente , Vol. 18 (2011), p. 11. Freikorps 50 , Ch. 1 ‘The Baltic States and International and States Baltic 1 ‘The , Ch. (Riga: LatvianInstitute of International and the White Army. Despite the Army. Despite White andthe Ƽ š & Žaneta Ozoli 49 Ƽ Alone any š observes, Ƽ Scientific a (eds.), 21 CEU eTD Collection PA: Euramerica Press, 1976), Ch. 2‘Toward the Goalof a Baltic Union’, pp. 118-167. 54 Paris & Vienna: PeterLang, 1999). State Sovereignty inthe Aftermath of theFirst World War 53 28. pp. 30-56; EdgarAnderson, ‘‘Towards Balticthe Union, 1927-1934’, 1(1968), pp. 17-39; Edgar Anderson, ‘Towards the Baltic Union 1920-27’, Rodgers, Emergence ofLithuania, Latvia,and Estonia Page, M. Crowe, and David the GreatPowers: Foreign Relations,works: 1938-1940 following the consult should reader the enquiry of the aspect this of understanding a practicable for nevertheless, relevant; wherever literature secondary tosuch thesis this interwar period has beena topic of muchdiscussion inhistorical literature.References are made throughout 51 federativeof of projects 1920sandthe early 1930s. 1918 and 1927. Europe work, seminal Lehti’s Marko Similarly, littoral eastern of covering the BalticSeainaseriesthe from 1960s. the of articles system offormingan alliance purpose the for initiatives interstate various of conferences 41-61, same as in Edgar Anderson,‘Toward Balticthe Union: The Initial Phase’, Mélanges dédiés à Kaarel R.Pusta 52 1975). focus the Entente, Baltic the of establishment the to led which developments vacillating region. the within initiative a state-cluster of development the on effect far had adirect them asthey so made to are references major powers, particularly states, other to With regard considered. be will collectively, or individually Lithuania, and Latvia Estonia, concerning Relations proceedings lies outside of the range of this account. Only the events within inInternational these states of involvement all of the account acomprehensive Therefore multifaceted. Bronis J.Kaslas, Bronis Marko Lehti, Marko The effect of major power politics upon the republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania during the during Lithuania and Latvia ofEstonia, republics the upon politics power major of effect The Edgar Anderson, ‘Toward the Baltic Entente: The Initial Phase’, inJüri G. Poska (ed.) The Formation of the Baltic States: A Study of the Effects of Great Power Politics upon the , thoroughly , thoroughly to form the endeavours various examines a Baltic Leaguebetween Edgar Anderson has written a series of comprehensive accounts of thediplomatic of accounts comprehensive of series a written has Anderson Edgar Developments of the period within International Relations were complex and complex were Relations International within period the of Developments Search for Security: A Study in Baltic Diplomacy, 1920-1934 A Baltic League as a Construct of theNew Europe: Envisioning a Baltic Region and Small 53 The Baltic Nations: The Quest for Regional Integration and Political Liberty Bronius J. Kazlauskas also wrote Bronius Kazlauskas of also J.wrote cursory proliferationthe accounts 51 (Stockholm: Publications duComité des amis de K.R. Pusta, 1965), pp. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1959); Hugh I. A Baltic League as a Construct of the New of A Baltic League asaConstruct (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1993); Stanley W. (Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, New York, 54 Lituanus Rather than reproducing the reproducing than Rather (Hamden, CT: ArchonBooks, Lituanus , Vol.13, Lituanus , Vol., 12, ʋ Pro Baltica: Pro , Vol. 14, The Baltic States 1(1967), pp. 5- ʋ (Pittston, 2(1966), ʋ 22 52 CEU eTD Collection Edizioni Plus – Pisa University Press, 2006), p. 113. (eds.), Beer Siegfried Amelang& 56 Years of Independence Macmillan, 2010), p. 104; Leji 33, Contribution of NationsSmall to Region-Building in North Eastern Europe’, Balticthe Entente: InitialThe Phase’, pp. 41-61; Jörg Hackmann, ‘From ‘Object’ to‘Subject’: The 55 between Lithuania andPoland. and, aunion configuration; War anEstonian-Finnish-Latvian Estonian Independence; of helped defendthefledgling republic againstan encroaching RedArmy during the ideas ofan Estonian-Finnish federation,in popular Estonia Finnish after volunteers the example, for were, state-clusters hypothetical these Amongst andLithuania. Latvia Estonia, incorporated that wereenvisioned Warregional Worldstate-clusters anumberof of First finalstages duringthe the beginningAtthe particularly of century, twentieth the THE INITIAL SCENE, 1918-1920 2.1 chapter. provide a historical background to Balticthe initiative Entente in examined followingthe in to order early 1930s the1920sand foreign Latvian policy throughout Lithuanian and willinEstonian, merely trends emerged. this chapter outline prevalent the Therefore, initiative latter the which from maelstrom political the convey to be will chapter this of back to the mid-1880s. Nevertheless, the idea of a Latvian-Lithuanian state, ideaof the back mid-1880s. the Nevertheless, a Latvian-Lithuanian to beyond an unofficial level, was that oflevel.” anunofficial on a remained Latvian-Lithuaniancertainly and state “werescholarsregional betweenindividual stuff configurations the salon of discussions which can be traced Eero Medijainen, ‘The Baltic Question in the Twentieth Century: Historiographic Aspects’, in James S. Anderson, ‘Strength& Weakness’, p. 80; Anderson, ‘Phantom or Reality?’, p.128; Anderson, ‘Toward ʋ 4 (2002),pp. 417-421; Andres Kasekamp, Perhaps the earliest of such hypothetical configurations, and one which went which one and configurations, hypothetical such of earliest the Perhaps , pp. 107-111. Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 154; Rauch, Public Power inEurope: Studies in Historical Transformations 55 As Eero Medijainen notes, these earlier forecasts of forecasts earlier these notes, Medijainen As Eero A History of the Baltic States 56 Journal of Baltic Studies (Basingstoke: Palgrave The Baltic States: The (Pisa: , Vol. 23 CEU eTD Collection Osteuropas Sovereignty’, ofLimited Idea the and League Baltic ‘The Lehti, Marko studies of the idea of a Baltic League seeLehti, League Baltic ofa idea ofthe studies 58 Baltic Nations Baltic, National and Regional Identity in Literature and Culture],on 30 regionai: baltiška, tautin international conference of an at the Institute 1885-1920’ of LithuanianIntellectuals, Literature of Lithuanian Works and the Folklore, in Nation entitled Latvian The DvitautosRace’: ir‘Lithuanian aštuoni ofthe Fragmentation ‘The entitled apaper as presented Originally forthcoming. Culture], and Literature literat & Silvestras Gaiži Wollen, ‘A Forgotten Episode: The Idea of a Latvian-Lithuanian State, c.1885-1920’, in Laura Laurušait 100. For athorough discussion of Lithuanian notions of a Latvian-Lithuanian state see James Montgomery Politics: The Years of the First Republic, 1918-1940 (ed.), Tuskenis Edvardas in Stage’, European the to of Lithuania Return ‘The Žalys, Unity’, “thegroupings of states: Norway, Scandinavian(Denmark, theeasternBaltic Sweden); between three alliances and political of economic a series of was theconcluding project concerned. form The prerequisitethe states of the between of the relationship envisioned concerns that Lithuanians werepro-German. that concerns Latvian thetwentieth collapseddue to century during decadeof second 1944), the ʋ Jurkynas, ‘Brotherhood Reconsidered: Region-Building in the Baltics’, Balticthe Entente: InitialThe Phase’, p. 42; Anderson, ‘Towards Balticthe Union: 1920-1927’; Mindaugas 57 ambitious. most and largest the of one was Conference, Peace Paris the to delegation Estonia’s (1883-1964), membersby Ants RobertPusta envisaged andPiip of (1884-1942) Kaarel First WorldWar and the Bolshevik Revolution. The independencelegaciesrespective Latvia warsof Estonia, Lithuania of and were the infledgling republics. theturbulentevents occurring thethreeoff wasdueto ground the predominantly expounded by predominantly JonasŠli émigrépublicists,Lithuanian expounded notably Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 80; Rodgers, Anderson, ‘Strength& Weakness’, p. 80; Anderson, ‘Phantom or Reality?’, p.128; Anderson, ‘Toward 1 (2004), p. 6; Kaslas, nj roje ir kult Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Of the proposed federative state-cluster projects, the idea of the League’,as ideaa ‘Baltic projects, of federative state-cluster Of proposed the got state-clusters examples ofproposed none latter of these that of reason Part the , NeueFolge, Bd. 45, H.(1997), 3 pp. 450-465 58 , pp. 118-123. It was from this notion of a Baltic League that later alliance projects adopted later projects alliance that League a Baltic of notion was from Itthis nj nj nas (eds.) roje [Two Nations and Eight Regions: Baltic, National and Regional Identity in ơ , regionin The Baltic Nations Dvitautos iraštuoni regionai: baltiška, tautin ơ savimon , p. 119; Antonius Piip, ‘The Baltic States as a Regional ơ literat A Baltic League as a Construct of theNew Europe (New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1999), pp. 99- nj 57 roje ir kult Search for Security nj roje [Two Nations and Eight Regions: th Journal of Baltic Studies Jahrbücher für Geschichte , Vol. 168 (1933), p. 175; Vytautas March 2012. See also, Kaslas, , p. 14. For comprehensive ơ , regionin Lithuania inEuropean ơ savimon nj pas (1861- ơ , Vol. 35, ; and, The ơ 24 CEU eTD Collection Intellectual Entente of the Baltic States’, p. 11. Sovereignty’, pp.453-455; Leji League as a Construct ofthe New Europe 61 ezeru”. Vokietijos nei jura, Rusijos nei 1940], (Vilnius: Lietuvos istorijos institutas, Vilniaus universitetas, 2008), p. 93: “Baltijos jura neturi tapti vienyb Zenonas Butkus, Zenonas in links], policy foreign and economic coordinated and defence associated with union Scandinavian and Baltic fora calling Pusta, R. [Kaarel] Conference, Peace Paris the to diplomat delegation Estonian of susiet Taikos konferencijos R. nario Pustos straipsnis, ragin 60 59 the signingthe of the (Lithuania,(Finland,Latvia), andthesouthern Baltic Poland).” Estonia, wake of an already notable collaboration of military forces between the three states, and forces states, military three betweenthe of collaboration notable wake of an already town of Valga, Estonia andValka, Latvia.Thismeeting place took 6 on border twin the became in what convened leaders military of conference a secret through Lithuania and Latvia union Estonia, formof a trilateral wasto first still The underway. Baltic Estonian, independence Seain1920,whilstthe warswere Latvian and Lithuanian the of littoral eastern the covering of description some states of an association consolidate century. early twentieth in the mapping mental regional of example forgotten but all an becoming concerned, interests states the of divergent disappeared the with latter 1934; meanwhile the Poland. and Finland to inaddition states three latter the forms:two asmall of grouping Estonia, LatviaandLithuania, and alargerone including that the “Baltic Sea does not become a Russian sea ora German lake”. behind the notion of a comprehensive Baltic Leaguewastoensure, remarked, as Pusta Anderson, ‘Strength & Weakness’, p. 80; Anderson, ‘Phantom or Reality?’, p. 128; Lehti, Document Rodgers, ą ơ gynybos, s id There were two missed opportunities, as Edgar Anderson refers to them, in materialised union or alliance, idea a ‘Baltic’ of the scale less ambitious On a to ơ Search for Security ja irpraktika 1918-1940 metais ʋ 2. 1918 m. lapkritis-gruodis, Paryžius. – Estijos diplomato, jos delegacijos prie Paryžiaus nj ý kio ir koordinuotos užsienio politicos saitais [November-December1918, Paris: Article eslovas Laurinavi Treaty ofGoodUnderstanding andCo-operation , p.14. Ƽ š, ‘The Quest forBaltic Unity’, 154; Stradi p. þ ius, Rimantas Miknys Žalys& Vytas Rimantas (eds.), ius, , p. 92;Lehti, ‘The Baltic League and the Idea of Limited Idea the and League Baltic ‘The 92;Lehti, , p. [The Idea and Practice of the Unity of the Baltic States: 1918- States: Baltic the of Unity of the Practice and Idea [The Ċ s sukurti Baltijos irSkandinavijos šali 61 The former materialised with materialised former The Ƽ š, ‘Beginnings of the Baltijos valstybi Baltijos on12 60 th 59 January,in the The intention The ǐ th A Baltic sa jung September ǐ ą , 25 CEU eTD Collection Moscow,and completed and signed at Riga, 11 http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1920/63.html ( Republic of Russia – Peace Treaty, signed at Tartu, 2 2012. Peace Treaty and Protocol, signed at Moscow, 12 http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1920/2.html ( Series, online at http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1922/92.html ( states and was closely followed by the western powers with their own diverging in convened upon feasibility todeliberate the a defensive groupingof five the order of Union, the with Soviet the concluded treaties Studies 63 Anderson,‘Towards Balticthe Union: 1920-1927’. 62 Soviet-Lithuanian Treaty conference which took place 15 inHelsinkiover took conference which step towardsconclude a larger Baltic union of Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. The first the consolidation of this project was undertaken at an international could build. military was intended form proposed that to abasealliance uponwhich leaders political agreements were made for the exchange of war materials, periodic meetings and a further afield. Bolsheviks”, as theLatvians consternation causing as andLithuanians amongst well the established blockade against break “helped international the to treaty Estonian-Soviet the of form the in Union with Soviet agreement the an armistice conference,latter concluded Estonia of the nascentthe Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian Furthermore, withingovernments. amonth Eero Medijainen, ‘Article 5: Permanent Neutrality in the Tartu Peace Treaty, 1920’, Treaty, Peace Tartu the in Neutrality Permanent 5: ‘Article Medijainen, Eero Anderson, ‘Military Policies and Plans’; Anderson, ‘Toward the Baltic Entente: The Initial Phase’, p. 48; , Vol. 41, Almost concurrently, second the ‘missedopportunity’ wastheopportunity to 62 The latter fell apart due to the emerging fears of political intrigues amongst intrigues political of fears emerging the to due apart fell latter The 63 ʋ 2 (2010), p. 202. The texts of the treaties are available in the League of Nations Treaty Treaty of Tartu Treaty of on on 12 th on 2 July, respectively, as Medijainen has noted, the noted, has Medijainen as respectively, July, th nd August1920 th February. Although February.Latvia Lithuania and also July 1920 nd February 1920 Lithuanian and Soviet Government of Russia – Latvia and Russia -Treaty of Peace, done at Treaty of Riga Treaty of : LNTSer2; 3LNTS 105), retrieved 15 : LNTSer63; 2LNTS 195); and, th -23 rd January. This conference was : LNTSer 92; 11LNTS 30); Esthonia on on 11 [sic] th Journal of Baltic August and the and Soviet th May 26 CEU eTD Collection Leji 69 68 67 45-46; Piip, ‘The Baltic States as a Regional Unity’, p.174; Rauch, 66 Stradi (Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi,2011), pp. 71-94; Kaslas, Martyn Housden & David J. Smith (eds.), see Marko Lehti, ‘The Dancing Conference of Bulduri: A Clash of Alternative Regional Futures’, in were occupied by Polish troops. interwar period. the failuresconclude configuration throughout to federative repeated state-cluster the a a following day Pi See also, Kaslas, See also, Baltica Stockholmiensia, 3 (Stockholm: Centre forBaltic Studies, University of Stockholm, 1988), p. 44.Hiden& Aleksander Loit(eds.), 65 64 had, on 7 Polish occupation of Vilnius. blocemerge.” wasbeginning to January von 1921; as Georg wouldRauch observed, it “a appearas though pan-Baltic wereintendedbebeforeby Bulduri conferences ratified to 1 participatingstates the interests. Council with a common economic and monetary union. monetary and acommon economic with Council convention and defensive military agreement, in addition to the idea of a Baltic Economic 6 6 from Riga) (near Bulduri at alliance of a defensive matter the discuss th Anderson, ‘Military Policies and Plans’; Feldmanis &Stranga, Feldmanis Plans’; and Policies ‘Military Anderson, Kaslas, Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 80 Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 80; Varslav p. 80; Weakness’, and ‘Strength Anderson, Crowe, Alberts Varslav coup d’état September; approving the proposal arbitration proposal approvingnon-aggression the pact, of September; a regional Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 155. Ƽ š, ‘Beginnings of Intellectual the Entente of Baltic the States’, pp. 12-13. Nevertheless, the work towards such a regional federation was dashed by dashed the was federation such a regional work towards the Nevertheless, The BalticNations The Baltic States and the Great Powers 64 th The respective representatives of the aforementioned states met again metagain to states aforementioned of the representatives Therespective October, agreed recognise however asthecapital theto Lithuania; Vilnius October, of and recapture the city. By 9 By city. the andrecapture Ɨ The Baltic Nations ns, ‘Baltic Alliance and International Politics in the First Part of the 1920s’, inJohn 69 á sudski issued orders to General to Lucjan issuedorders sudski , pp. 147-148;Page, The Baltic in International Relations between the Two World Wars 67 , pp. 129-131. The Polish administration ThePolish of administration Józef Pi 66 68 Vilnius was a factor which cannot be underestimated in Forgotten Pages in Baltic History: Diversity and Inclusion The Formation of the Baltic States , p. 7. For a detailed account of the Bulduri conference Bulduri ofthe account a detailed For 7. p. , th October, Vilnius and the surrounding region Ɨ ns, ‘Baltic Alliance and International Politics’, pp. Politics’, International and Alliance ‘Baltic ns, The Baltic Nations The Destiny of the Baltic Entente 65 Years of Independence ĩ The labours of the Helsinki and Helsinki the of labours The eligowski (1865-1947) to stage (1865-1947)to eligowski , pp. 137-142; and , p.182. á sudski (1867-1935) sudski , p.108. th August- , p. 14; , Studia 27 st CEU eTD Collection Regional Unity’, p.174; Rauch, ‘Brotherhood Reconsidered’, p. 7; Leji 73 York, 2004), p. 113. Boundary of Two Worlds: Identity, Freedom, and Moral Imagination in the Baltics (Amsterdam & New Nikžentaitis, Stefan Schreiner & Darius Stali both Lithuania and Poland was clearly impossible.” clearly was Poland and Lithuania both “the of and establishment and lost, a federal Bulduri subsequently was union embracing 72 Aidai, 2002), p. 7. his head effecthethe live that to not could Vilnius.” without “theso-called hadof ordinary Lithuanian new the a generation hammeredintostereotype Consciousness’, inGrigorijus Potašenko (ed.), 71 70 Laimonas Briedis’ Laimonas not a straightforward matter of Poles capturingwas Vilnius of a ‘Lithuanian’ occupation the However, city. symbol. Vilnius, historic national as the Lithuanian titlea and point of notion of the historic around idea the of differencespronounced between Lithuaniansandthe the Poles, andthe city of Vilnius as the nation’s eternal capital had been a rallying Vilnius alone. Vilnius found Blackcanbe Baltic between within andthe Seas, spannedthe zenith territory the multinational the heritage of once the itsexpansive Grand Duchy which Lithuania, of at of Grandthe Lithuania:of Duchy PerspectivesHistorical Consciousness’of outlined how majority ethnicinterwar period. the during Republic of Lithuanian of Republic Lithuanian of interwarthe as of period, declared newly in the Nevertheless, Lithuanian. is itas etc., Tartar, Russian, Belarusian, Kaslas, ý Alfredas Bumblauskas, ‘The Heritage of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: Perspectives of Historical of Perspectives Lithuania: of Duchy Grand of the Heritage ‘The Bumblauskas, Alfredas Laimonas Briedis, eslovas Laurinavi As such, the progress towards the conclusion of a larger ‘Baltic’ union at Helsinki The nationalLithuanian movement andnation-building programme were built The BalticNations 71 The so-called multi-ethnic legacy legacy of city is The multi-ethnic the so-called as much Jewish, Polish, Vilnius: City of Strangers þ ius, ‘Lithuanian General Aspects of Domestic Policy, 1918-1940’, in Alvydas Vilnius:City of Strangers , pp. 147-148;Page, Years of Independence Ƽ š, ‘The Quest forBaltic Unity’, p. 155; Piip, ‘The Baltic States as a nj nas (eds.), (Budapest: Central EuropeanUniversity 2009).Press, The Peoples of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania The Formation of the Baltic States 70 Alfredas Bumblauskas, in his ‘The Heritage ‘The his in Bumblauskas, Alfredas , p. 108; Robertas Žiugžda, ‘Lithuania in suggests was a city without a so-called without city wasa suggests The Vanished World of Lithuanian Jews ý eslovas Laurinavieslovas 73 Moreover, as Inesis Feldmanis and 72 þ , p.182;Jurkynas, ius aptly aptly ius describes, (Vilnius: , On the 28 CEU eTD Collection 75 74 Studies, University of Stockholm, 1988), p. 61. Quotation from Rauch. Relations between the Two World Wars International Relations in 1920s’,the in John Hiden& Aleksander Loit(eds.), paralyze the defensive system of” Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania collectively. Lithuania and Latvia Estonia, of” system defensive the paralyze magic actedasabitter to “thedispute circle describe, Polish-Lithuanian Aivars Stranga the parties concerned. Broadly speaking two preponderant attitudes canbepreponderant attitudes discerned; speaking two partiesthe concerned. Broadly of interests by divergent the werehampered endeavours their 1920 and 1925.However, between conferences expertandprofessional ministers andvarious between meetings sporadic into addition ministers; foreign a series meetingsof of their through periodic continued their “as theBaltic endeavours quadrupleentente.” HelsinkiandBulduri of beginning, participatingconferences states the other the was century of twentieth asthethirdthe Meanwhile, decade Weimar Germany. regaining of the territory the majorand courting through powers Sovietthe Union with recovery the viewingand theof Vilnius surrounding its region, bestchance of its association with the building of a ‘Baltic’ regional formation. It became preoccupied Following the Polish occupation of Vilnius,Lithuania withdrew a (to certain extent)from THE QUADRUPLE, TRIPLE &DUAL ALLIANCES, 1920-1933 2.2 quadruple, triple anddual alliances. categories: different be can into three divided projects federative by parties.These third includenot both Lithuania andPoland, presentinga region could that be easily exploited in be could federativeany anumber they projects time, at one play continued of there to Piip, ‘The Baltic States as a Regional Unity’, p. 174. Feldmanis & Stranga, Feldmanis Estonia, Finland, Latvia and Poland attempted to continue effort to cooperative their attempted Estonia,and Poland Finland,Latvia The Destinyof the Baltic Entente , Studia Baltica Stockholmiensia, 3 (Stockholm: Centre forBaltic , p. 14. p. , 75 The Baltic in International 74 Whilst 29 CEU eTD Collection 78 and Weakness’, p. 80. 77 Experiences ‘Closeness’’, inMarko Lehti &David J. Smith (eds.), ValtersŠ Future: An account of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia 2009), pp. 265; Leji 76 within period. the Latvia)throughout a lesser extent to it withinbeingcommon was (as old Estonia “good the days” Swedish of thetrope with countries, theScandinavian with cooperation towards were orientated Finland and Estonia south. and north between fashion latitudinal in a states the dividing down well with the other states. other the with well down underfour states leadership; her own presenting adomineering which attitude go notdid tounite the She herbetrayed of attempted haddesigns delusions entente, grandeur. that inwith another. one accord necessarily albeitnot four states, the between alliance a quadruple prospectof the about enthusiastic interwar period. Latvia’s sympathetic disposition towards Lithuaniainterwarso much Latvia’ssympathetic towards period. not disposition was maintained acordial neighbour Lithuaniawith hersouthern the relationship throughout initiative, a federative cooperation with Balticthe littoral pursuing concerned Sea’s herself. athreatto pose might somewhat critical became her,Poland ofexcluded that littoral eastern Sea’s ontheBaltic efforts cooperation the idea of a small Balticquadruple entente;thoughitnever truly off got Conscious ground. the of such union, fearing that trilateral cooperation FinlandEstonia, of Latvia and whichexcluded Poland the so-called such a regional unit Leji Anderson, ‘Military Policies Plans’;and Anderson, ‘Phantom or Reality?’, p.127; Anderson, ‘Strength Tiina Kirss & Rutt Hinrikus (eds.), Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 155; Kasekamp, þ On the one hand Poland, by far the largest of the four states fourof of hand states On thebyfar largestquadruple the the Poland,one On the other hand Latvia, quite possibly the most enthusiastic of all the states on thestates all mostenthusiastic of possibly the quite Latvia, hand On other the erbinskis, ‘Looking for Neighbours: Origins and Development of Latvian Rhetoric on Nordic on Rhetoric of Latvian Development and Origins Neighbours: for ‘Looking erbinskis, (London: Frank Cass Publishers, 2003), pp.158-164. Ƽ š, ‘The Quest forBaltic Unity’, p.155; OwenRutter, 78 Estonian Life Stories 77 As such, to a certain extent there was a nascent 76 Meanwhile, Latvia and Poland were more Meanwhile,Latvia and Poland were (London: Methuen &CO. Ltd., 1925), p. 117. See Post-Cold War Identity Politics: Northern and Baltic (Budapest: Central European University Press, A History of the Baltic States The New Baltic States & their , p. 120. 30 CEU eTD Collection 80 Returnof Lithuania’, pp. 108-110. 79 assistance. such tooffer prepared not reacquisition of Vilnius and in its dispute with Poland. However, Estonia and Latvia were infor military of andLatvian Estonian the wasLithuania’s desire problem support the At heart the of Lithuania. cooperating with prospect tothe was ill-disposed Sweden, who states were attempting togain the favour of the Scandinavian countries, ormore precisely two Finland, the and Estonia caseof the alliance.In ofquadruple the states three other the two major powers. As such,Latvia’s cordial relationship was notreceived well by the support againstPoland she inthe was dispute Vilnius footholda prospective foreither of Polish attack upon upon PolishLithuania. attack a of eventuality the in impartial remain not would they that Vilnius) of occupation the 1926 fell when apart Sovietthe Union informed Kaunas(the provisional capital during Forexample betweeninterwar Latvia in period. atreaty talks regarding and Lithuania surrounding region, the which determined latter state’s foreign the policy throughout mostcooperation, tellingly by exploiting recoverLithuania’s Vilniusdesire to and the an undesirable weakness in their security system. was entente quadruple in the Lithuania of absence the and Union Soviet the and Germany asolid blocLatvia wanted separating as it was basedupon pragmatic security concerns: state, a Latvian-Lithuanian federative of proposition Lithuanian earlier in witnessed the based ratherupon – or disguised as–notionslinguisticso-called of ethnic kinship,as and Leji Leji Ƽ Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 155; Kasekamp, š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity, p. 156; Kasekamp, As Lithuania actively both courted Germany Unionand the Soviet for their The Soviet Union played a handin the impeding of form any of ‘Baltic’ 79 80 Whilst the principal reason for the reluctance of reluctance for the reason principal Whilstthe A History of the Baltic States A History of the Baltic States , p. 120; Žalys, ‘The , p. 120. 31 CEU eTD Collection Latvia’s advocacy of cooperation with Lithuania. Naturally the two Finnic-speaking Naturally two the with of Latvia’s advocacy Lithuania. cooperation of EstoniaSweden’s sentiments, andloath Finland were to lose favour with her over Fully aware Latvia. to Lithuania with cooperation over concern voiced Sweden discretely On factor. a number of occasions asadangerous Germany issuewith Memel/Klaipeda viewed Lithuania inher with active dispute Poland over Vilniusand the pervading with the two states concluded a political and military alliance on 7 politics high of level the to fully advanced efforts these War, World First the followed immediately that state-clusters hypothetical of earlier discussions the Unlike Latvia. and level between variousEstonia degrees,atabilateral to alsoexisted, notable cooperation city the and surrounding the region, international adding the to of tension 1930s. the of reacquisition laterHowever,usual relationsdesiredthe Lithuania. Nazi with Germany betweenrelations Weimar Lithuania Poland. and maintained Meanwhile, Germany their improve little to could bedone in1923, January With manoeuvre place taking spirit. this Entente powers with unfavourable decision, Lithuanian staged arevolt the the andgovernment presented claim regionto the along ethnographiclines,wishing however, not towaitfor an becomingGermany, of aprotectorate Ententepowers.Both the Lithuanialaid andPoland for thecity of Klaip 81 the Memel/Klaipthe Estonia and Latvia in this respect was the Vilnius dispute, there was no less concern over Leji Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 156. Meanwhile, Sweden, valuing her neutrality allabove else in her foreign policy, foreign relations, landscape of to the level afurther of To add complication Memel, as it was commonly called during the interwar period is the German name ơ da issue that later issue emerged that da betweenGermany and Lithuania. fait accompli fait ơ da, which followingda, theFirst World War wasdetached from claiming that the city was ‘Lithuanian’, at leastin th July 1921. 81 32 CEU eTD Collection 82 of inof theLithuanian Estonian-Latvian alliance. remarked following inFebruary upon 1923, possibilitythe theincident, of inclusion the have Herministerinto influenced Estonia’s Riga,Julius (1883-1936), Seljamaa outlook. hope thatits resolution normalisewould Polish-Lithuanian therelations, incidentappears inpartlyLithuania extended incident, the to support duringthe diplomatic considerable with Lithuania. collaborating of prospect tothe say obstinately everyoneopposed notto was is that although that states generally viewed Latvia’s cultivation of Lithuanian cooperation unfavourably; countries; critical of Latvia’s attempts to draw Lithuania into the cooperation, largely cooperation,the intodraw Lithuania to attempts Latvia’s of countries; critical Scandinavian the towards orientation pronounced Finland’s because of however pass notcomefrom Thisconfiguration instances to theirdid Poland excluded activities. in certain who Latvia, and Finland Estonia, of that was first The ententes. triple ‘Baltic’ join an to such alliance. idea ofinviting Poland the outright rejected Galvanauskas notwithstanding, latter The Latvia. and Estonia with preclude relationship sufficientto reason no acloser they and that insurmountable were (1882-1967), the Prime Minister of Lithuania, assured Hellat that the difficulties were not Galvanauskas Ernestas Nevertheless, issue. Vilnius the over relations Lithuanian-Polish was contention of thorn main the As ever, union. a trilateral of matter the broach and states between three the relations commercial better develop to in order same year LithuaniaMinister, visited Aleksanderthe May Latvia and Hellat(1882-1943) during of Anderson, ‘Towards Balticthe Union: 1920-1927’. Despite the initial controversy of the Memel/Klaip the of controversy initial the Despite Side by side, two other ‘Baltic’ configuration endeavours emerged, known as the emerged, known ‘Baltic’endeavours other configuration side,two Side by 82 Furthermore, the Estonian Foreign ơ da incident, whilst Latvia whilst incident, da 33 CEU eTD Collection 84 Press, 2005), p. 533. Steiner, S. 83 constituted one of the significant factors to its failure. on the other Poles. to the opposition latter’s issue of the thethorny over hand continued to draw closer, even after the Baltic Entente, which defined borders; betweendefined this borders; causedfriction them as in instancesa numberthey of each clearly without into existence came states three the earlier, mentioned As emerged. initiative Entente Baltic the that above outlined maelstrom political the from was It FORGING THE BALTIC ENTENTE, 1934 2.3 period. interwarthe decisions in turbulentthe response to withindevelopments throughoutpolitics European was devised in 1934, aswillbe seen below, wasthe resultof pragmatic political that effort cooperative Lithuanian and Latvian Estonian, The states. three these between initiative a political develop such plan to coherent or distinctive therewasno However, in and Latvia. Estonia in softdictatorships inThese werestates, Lithuania established.occurred 1926and1934 republics each only experiencedFurthermore, West.the is it noteworthy thethat Estonian, LatvianandLithuanian a short period of so-called towards itswhen attention turned out itPoland 1920suntil petered late the intocontinued democratic rule. In all three ‘Baltic States’. Nevertheless, Estonian, Finnish, Latvian and Polishthe as cooperation collectively known commonly today states three the Lithuania; and Latvia Estonia, Leji Kasekamp, Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 155; Rauch, It was out of this myriad of political relationships that the Baltic Entente emerged. The Lights that Failed: European International History,1919-1933 A History of the Baltic States , pp. 119-120; Leji Years of Independence Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 155; Zara 84 The second was composed of composed Thesecond was 83 Estonian-Finnish relations Estonian-Finnish , p.183. (Oxford: Oxford University Oxford (Oxford: 34 CEU eTD Collection 87 Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 156. 86 85 agreement of the two participants. Latvia union;the andcountriesinto subjectto the mutual for entry allowing the other of years inFebruary 1934 by of the coordination outlining foreign the policy of and Estonia between thetwostates in was July again 1921. It expanded and another for extended ten years.for of aperiod ten third party militaryprovided for support in of event the eitheraggression towards from country a agreement defence mutual This resolved. also were obligations financial War-time (which was andtheislanddivided), Rohnu inthe of Gulf Estonia.Riga wascededof to of dispute inof town the Valka/Valga over a border struck settlement the 1923after mutual was defence Analliance of Estonia and Latvia. of bilateral the collaboration which legislated Estonian,LatvianandLithuanian be, cooperation begancame to with waithowever,had to a little Latvia meandering longer.through Nevertheless, the process in states was1921. consolidated two international arbitration help of warswith the independence Baltic during the the Lithuania Sea accessto of members of the thatallowed itLatvia border adjustments was cededDaugavpils. with to Eventually League of Nations; the border between the states. thethree between of initial wasone rapprochement of areas the their borders international forindependence andduring their of search wars, consolidation recognition, their during efforts collaborative their After territories. same the to claim lay Anderson, ‘Military Policies and Plans’. Rauch, Rauch, The frontier dispute between Latvia and Lithuania centred on the town of town on the centred andLithuania Latvia between frontier dispute The Years of Independence Years of Independence , p. 181;Kasekamp, , pp. 99-100; Žalys, ‘TheReturn of Lithuania’, p. 102. 85 87 86 For the consolidation of their border with Estonia As Georg von Rauch asserts, the latter was a latter the von Rauchasserts, As Georg It was an expansion of a trade treaty concluded A History of the Baltic States , p. 120; Leji Ƽ š, ‘The 35 CEU eTD Collection praktika precise principles of mutual cooperation and to ensure that the Baltic countries do not jeopardise one jeopardise not do another countries with their Baltic the actions that or ensure specific to and problems], cooperation inButkus, of mutual et al. more (eds.), principles define to precise proposes which Estonia, and Latvia to of Lithuania Government the of Memorandum šalys savo veiksmais nepakenkt Estijai, kuriame si 93 30. 92 182. 91 90 89 88 intensive five-month negotiation of the Baltic Entente. Baltic the of negotiation five-month intensive the Lithuanian Foreign Ministry, set the tone and the first steps were taken in a fairly Poland, who wasin viewed turn as a vital byEstoniaally and Latvia. with in her conflict sole supporter her latter the Lithuania considered Union, Sovietthe Germany and about concerned equally had Whilst been Latvia thegreater threat. posed cooperation was until pointthis theirwhich perceptions differing asto of their neighbours sovereignties. totheirthreat respective Nazi Soviet and elevated intendedprovision for Lithuania. specifically Latvia with regard to closer collaboration. tocloser with regard Latvia isolated. Subsequently completely intenseshe initiated with negotiations and Estonia signed non-aggression treaties with Poland earlyin 1934, Lithuania found herself Union and both Germany theSoviet When with Poland. inherdisputes theterritorial assist to becausehadand Latviawereunwilling 1923treaty the outside Estonia remained three states. three between the cooperation intimate pursue more to she that sought Latvian counterparts Document Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 81; Feldmanis &Stranga, Feldmanis p. 81; Weakness’, and ‘Strength Anderson, Ibid,pp. 120, 122; Leji Kasekamp, Leji Leji Ƽ Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 156; Rauch, š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity’, p. 156; Rauch, , pp.502-503; Kaslas, One of One factors of had hinderedthat principal the Estonian, Lithuanian Latvian and On the 25 ʋ A History of the Baltic States 92 181. 1934 m. balandžio 25., Kaunas. –Lietuvos vyriausyb An nj loma tiksliau apibr Aide memoire th April 1934,the Lithuanianinformed government her Estonian and Ƽ š, ‘The Quest forBaltic Unity’, pp.156-157; Rauch, The BalticNations ǐ n ơ vienai iš j ơ of of Juozas Urbšys theSecretary (1896-1991), General of žti tarpusavio beadradarbiavimo pricipus ir r , p. 122. ǐ , turin , pp. 173-175. 91 þLǐ Years of Independence Years of Independence 88 specifini The impetus for these actions was the was actions these for impetus The ǐ problem 93 The Destiny of theBaltic Entente Essentially, the memorandum the Essentially, Baltijos valstybi ơ s memorandumas Latvijai ir ǐ 89 [25 , pp.180-181. , p.181. Years of Independence th April 1934,Kaunas: 90 nj pintis, kad Baltijos As such Lithuania ǐ vienyb ơ s id ơ , p. , p. ja ir 36 CEU eTD Collection 95 94 Soviet Union had With previously been the growingopposed. and power potential threat such initiative.Union an The signalled Soviet of towards It the of attitude achange virtuallyobstacle to all variousthe cooperativeof proposed alliances within region.the compromise with other statesa comediscussions. theLithuanian Until point, this to government’s unwillingness to in relation to its conflict of from matter Vilnius exclude the agreedto second,Lithuania with dispute Poland; with Poland had inbeenassistthem militarily the unable Estoniato the andLatvia were that acknowledged the majorit First neighbours. northern her and Lithuania of governments the between foreign policy act able to harm any one of the three states. havein specificproblemsandshould, nameof the from unity,any refrain domestic or theirgeographic different situations andhistories Estonia, LatviaandLithuania could due to that indicate does document the Nevertheless, interests. or conflicts irreconcilable maintain their unity in international politics, whilst denying that the three states and unity inhave countries ideaof their ‘Baltic’ tospread common the duty threestates the of any of them must be the concern of all three states. Urbšys’ communiqué elaborates upon the affectingindependencein factors maintaining independence their that of and any the one vague uponwhich principles might solidarity’ ‘Baltic be founded. calls for close cooperation between Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and offers a list of Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 81. Rodgers, Two pointsTwo distinguished from Urbšys’memorandum communicationsprevious interested vitally are Lithuania and Latvia that Estonia, states The memorandum Search for Security , p.96. 94 37 95 CEU eTD Collection al. (eds.), et Butkus, in Entente], Baltic ofthe conference preparatory inthe heads delegation ofthe speeches opening Baltijos Antant Baltijos 98 97 29; Leji 96 matter of ‘specific foreign The joint policy. a necessity and the of ofcooperation theprinciples concerning problems’, security in their partof Europe. referringgreater draw closer andwere to contributing together thus to egoistic inseeking designs haveto not did any states three thatthe stressed similarly Munters security. peace and the their Polish strengthening states; three all of situation international the improve to endeavouring occupationseeking of benefitsVilnius forjust werenot delegations participating all three that conviction expressedthe Lozoraitis their and own state.the He spoke briefly about how Munters (1898-1967), to discuss technicalities the of the a trilateral alliance. participants were Vilhelms Ministry, Foreign Latvian the General of Secretary the and respectively, Estonian and foreignministers,LozoraitisLithuanian Seljamaa and (1898-1983), Stasys regional alliance. regional a formingof in respect Lithuania from proposals receive concrete to agreed ministries of Estonian foreign the secretary-generals Latvian and the the Three weekspassedbefore politically region disunited on her westernfrontier would endangerher security. fearinga that federative the projects, to heropposition sheabandoned of Nazi Germany Document Feldmanis & Stranga, Feldmanis Anderson, ‘Military Policies and Plans’; Feldmanis &Stranga, Feldmanis Plans’; and Policies ‘Military Anderson, Ƽ During the first preliminary conference, which took place took over 7 firstpreliminary which During conference, the Riga and Tallinn acted with notable caution to the Lithuanian memorandum. notable the Lithuanian Riga to acted with caution Tallinn and š, ‘The Quest forBaltic Unity’, pp.156-157; Rauch, Baltijos valstybi ʋ 182. 1934 m. liepos 7 d. Kaunas. – Lietuvos ir Latvijos delegacij ơ s sudarymo parengiamojoje konferencijoje [7 konferencijoje parengiamojoje s sudarymo 97 However, two preliminary conferences were organised between the between wereorganised conferences preliminary two However, The Destinyof the Baltic Entente ǐ vienyb ơ s id 98 ơ ja ir praktika The conference resulted in the agreement upon matters upon in agreement the resulted Theconference , pp. 504-505. , pp. 30-31; Rodgers, th Years of Independence July 1934, Kaunas: Lithuanian and Latvian The Destiny of the Baltic Entente Search for Security ǐ vadov , pp. 195-196. ǐ kalbos pirmojoje th -9th July, -9th 96 , pp. 27- , p. 96. 38 CEU eTD Collection Riga: “Protocol to the preparatory conference of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania [II] for the treaty of the of treaty the for [II] Lithuania and Latvia of Estonia, conference preparatory the to “Protocol Riga: konferencijos, skirtostrij konferencijos, 100 (eds.), et al. Butkus, in Entente], Baltic ofthe conference preparatory first ofthe results ofthe notice Agency] sudarymo parengiamosios konferencijos rezultatus [10 99 on the Vilnius issue. Vilnius the on while insisting expression that the an of opinion not weakenshould Lithuania’s position Lithuania’sLozoraitis agreed, specific problem. about expressthem opinion their to cooperation allow exception the demanded In point. addition,to that andLatvia Estonia acceptcooperation this not to agreement;however,Lithuaniathe in annexof did the proposed including EstoniaEstonian exception the delegates Latvian and andLatvia. The to concern specific of problems other any have not did it that and problem a specific cooperation principle. beEstonia problemsthe wouldspecific Latvia; they outside should resolved and arise, to acceptable was essentially that problems formulation of specific athe presented delegation countries. The Lithuanian of cooperation replacedall three byoneforthe behad to in the1934agreement andLatvian for Estonian established the procedure relations ofbetween the three the of forproblems the resolution formulas Additionally, several states. three the policies of statesparties, must shouldmethods for coordinating was theforeign which concerning the agreement reached an be registered they arise, in anwere agreementorganise in Riga in Tallinn or nearthe future. considered; wassurrounding region, until waspostponed nextconference,the which they decided to approved. and, the ruleThe that any new Document Document Baltijos valstybi Lozoraitis thatLithuania indicated be would only treating the Vilnius question as place took in later The secondRiga on 29 conference preliminary ʋ ʋ 183. 1934 m. liepos 10 d., Kaunas. – “Eltos” pransešimas apie pirmosios Baltijos Antant 185. 1934 m. rugpj ǐ vienyb ǐ 100 šali ǐ bendradarbiavimo sutarties sudarymui, protokolas” [29 protokolas” sudarymui, sutarties bendradarbiavimo ơ s id njþ ơ ja ir praktika io 29 d., Ryga.– “Latvijos, EstijosLietuvos ir [II]parengiamosios , p. 505. 99 th July 1934, Kaunas: “ELTA” [LithuanianNews th August 1934, th August,at ơ 39 s CEU eTD Collection praktika agreement applies only to the cooperation Vilnius and unity ofthe question], three article in inButkus, problem specific the et that al. (eds.),explaining Estonia and Latvia problemos lie aiškinanti, kad Santarv kad aiškinanti, http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1934/227.html, retrieved 24 101 The Baltic Nations 102 problem of Vilnius.” Lithuanianthe noted “therepresentative that 3rdparagraph shall be applied the only to whilst article”; 3rd of the agreement abovementioned of the application require the might that problems “specific no had states their that noted representatives Latvian and Estonian the indicates that timeas treaty same the signed atthe agreement which asecret To three countries”], in Butkus, et(eds.), al. operation Latvian and Lithuanian delegates signedthe Article 3 of the Document , p. 518: “3-iojo straipsnio nuostatos b Thus, having finally navigated the contentious Vilnius issue, Estonian, the on on 17 undertakings laid down in Article I of the present Treaty. difficult. They agree problems such that constitute an exception tothe them to regard with attitude concerted a make specific might the which of problems existence the recognise Parties Contracting High The ʋ þ ia tik Vilniaus klausim 187.1934 m. rugs , pp. 175-176. Treaty ofGood Understanding and Co-operation th September 1934. The reads: Septemberthird 1934. article ơ s ir bendradarbiavimo sutarties tre sutarties bendradarbiavimo s ir 102 ơ jo 12 d., Ženeva. –Slapta Lietuvos, Latvijos irEstijos deklaracija, ą [12 Baltijos valstybi th September 1934, Geneva: Secret declaration of Lithuania, declaration Secret Geneva: 1934, September njWǐ taikomos tikVilniaus problemai.” Treaty of Good UnderstandingTreaty of andCo- ǐ þ vienyb iajame straipsnyje minimos specifin minimos straipsnyje iajame ơ s id , the Treaty is available online at online available is Treaty , the th ơ ja ir praktika of November2011. Baltijos valstybi 101 , pp. 506-515; Kaslas, ǐ vienyb ơ s ơ s id ơ ja ir 40 CEU eTD Collection 1976), Ch. 4‘Activity Balticof the Entente’ pp. 182-207. Baltic Nations: The Quest for Regional Integration and Political Liberty 1934-1940 Stockholmiensis, 1988), pp. 79-99; Inesis Feldmanis & Aivars Stranga, Relations between the Two Wars 1940: Its Strength & Weakness’, in John Hiden& Aleksander Loit(eds.), UniversityState Press,1978), pp. 126-135, notes: 217-219; Edgar Anderson,‘The Baltic Entente, 1914- Misiunas (eds.), Misiunas 103 operation Latvia andLithuania. With signingthe of the The Baltic Entente represented a new phase in the history1934-1940 &LITHUANIA, LATVIA ESTONIA, of the republics OF THE MENTALMAPPING ENTENTE& CHAPTER III:THE BALTIC of Estonia, period merely provides orientation to the main narrative of the text. region; distinctive a as namelyLithuania and Latvia Estonia, of mapping mental the to contributed the ‘Baltic States’.little. Therefore, interpretations ofits– accounts differ activities – the introduction during discussed a survey pessimistic and optimistic of of exception alternating With the aspects. political the political history of the as aunified political entity. anddomestically internationally present themselves to began countries three the Entente cooperation, tothis Although wereprecedents by there sanctioned treaty. political cooperation as described in the previous chapter, with the emergence of the Baltic See Edgar Anderson, ‘The Baltic Entente: Phantom or Reality?’, in V. Stanley Vardys & Romauld J. 103 Treatments of the Baltic Entente have thus far focussed predominantly on predominantly focussed far thus have Entente Baltic the of Treatments The present chapter is concerned with the activities of the Baltic Entente that Entente Baltic the of activities the with is concerned chapter Thepresent (Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, 1994), pp. 45-59; and, Bronis J. Kaslas, on on 12 The Baltic States in Peace and War and Peace in States Baltic The th September 1934 the three republics entered for thefirstinto time republics three Septemberentered 1934 the , Studia Baltica Stockholmiensia, 3 (Stockholm: Acta Universitatis (University Park, PA & London: The Pennsylvania Treaty ofGoodUnderstandingTreaty andCo- The Destiny of the Baltic Entente, Baltic the of The Destiny (Pittston, PA: Euramerica Press, The Baltic States in International The 41 CEU eTD Collection 1940] (Vilnius: Lietuvos istorijosinstitutas,2008), p. 524. vienyb 104 and Lithuania during the period of the Baltic Entente initiative. For the most part, the initiative. most the part, For Balticthe Entente and periodthe of Lithuania during notyield a great deal of information with regard to the mental mapping of Estonia, Latvia they do considerably detailed, although areavailable, minutes where conferences later the In ties. cultural and economic strengthen could they which by modes and another, of toone discussed states three providing support and political diplomatic procedures the of representatives that is evident It informative. nonetheless are they conferences, during asdetailed andlater are not astheminutes produced textual other sources summarybe distributedto through diplomatic channels. organisation, Estonian the Ministry of Affairs,Foreign producea wasrequired to dohost so. Nevertheless,not to obliged the their minutes, although were own they take to was able eachdelegation Entente, Baltic the of conferences of formalities the the 2 At firstthe in –convened of Tallinnfrom periodicthe conferences 30 AN ENTHUSIASTIC BEGINNING, 1934-1936 3.1 final bid to retain their sovereignty during the early years of the Second World War. regional invariousfields;cooperation in lull 2) a such activities; and ineffective 3) an consolidate to efforts of enthusiastic 1)anearly period in initiatives: can bediscerned the periods Three distinct legislative andcultural enterprises. of pursued avariety economic, nd Zenonas Butkus, Zenonas December –none December of present parties minutesthe took of discussions.the With regard to ơ s id Although the summary and a separate record of the decisions of conference of the recordof decisions the a separate summary and Although the it Entente, theBaltic of activities cooperative of the nature the to With regard ơ ja irpraktika 1918-1940 metais ý eslovas Laurinavi þ ius, Rimantas Miknys Žalys& Vytas Rimantas (eds.), ius, [The Idea and Practice of the Unity of the Baltic States, 1918- 104 Baltijos valstybi Baltijos th November- ǐ 42 CEU eTD Collection 106 The Destiny of the Baltic Entente Powers: Foreign Relations, 1938-1940 105 Estonia,relationships between Latvia and Lithuania: and beginningthe period from a newphase inthe of verifies break preceding the the by by itsAnderson.Assuming faithfulit immediately Kazlauskas, Edgar reproduction atlength byBronius Kazlauskas andlaterquoted was diplomaticreproduced It channels. through it Paristowhere was communicated legation to archives of Lithuanian the Minister, K Office. Foreign Latvian the of Secretary-General the Munters, Vilhelms was delegation Latvian the of representative primary the respectively; Lozoraitis, Stasys and Seljamaa Julius relevant. wherever beutilised will sources other Nevertheless, conferencesfor noteworthy. most the part,this Assuch, sources examination of textual the of the will speeches foreign ministers,of although the information some cultural on activities is focus in the are reiterated that matters legislative and economic with areconcerned minutes upon the speeches of the heads of the three delegations. Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 84. Ibid; Anderson, Ibid; ‘Strength and Weakness’,p. 82;David M. Crowe, 105 The opening speech of the conference’s host, Seljamaa, was preserved in Seljamaa,preserved the was host, conference’s the The openingspeech of The Estonian and Lithuanian delegations by foreignwere headed ministers, their At this time the Foreign Minister of Latvia was also the country’s Prime country’s the also was Latvia of Minister Foreign the time this At of our peoples, is period,now which lasted a little too long, in the atlightof thecommon interestsan end. We are true at the time of the now1924 Conference and those preceding it. That at the point ofneed seek to methodsout andformsentering for common collaboration, was as a differences in very the on whichprinciples they are based. We no longer between the Conferencesof the and past the present,considering the Estonia, Latvia,of and Lithuania Ministers atKaunas. Foreign Butof the there is agreat Conference difference the in 1924, in ago, years I recall with great satisfaction having had the pleasure of taking part, ten Ɨ rlis Ulmanis (1877-1942). , p. 45; Kaslas, (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1993), p. 24; Feldmanis & Stranga, 106 The Baltic Nations , p. 183. The Baltic States and Greatthe 43 CEU eTD Collection vyriausyb kukliomis j kukliomis Pabalt kelion 523: “T speech during the reception of K. Ulmanis, travelling to the forthcoming first conference of the Baltic of the conference Entente first to be held forthcoming in the Tallinn], to in Butkus, travelling etUlmanis, alof K. (eds.), reception the during speech vykstant vykstant Lithuania. openingaddress, Seljamaa’s tobe which appears onlyextantspeech,the ends and Latvia mappingEstonia, of mental the regarding information deal of reveal agreat Estonian,the Latvian and Lithuanian republics. 108 107 efforts”. his “modest contribute to he pleasure hadthe which to new period” entered a Baltic States 1934] the of Good Understandingof andCo-operation the first Lithuanian Minister of Foreign Affairs to do so under the rationale of the Entente Lozoraitis joy visit expressedhis Riga, on histo that toTallinn, he was en route by atthispolicymakers point, thoughnot necessarily as official rhetoric.political ‘Baltic’expression determine to Estonian,Latvian and Lithuanians was incertainly use the of use the Nevertheless, community. a‘Baltic’ of notion the of evidence immediate nois there plural pronouns, first person use the through of of unity underscoring idea the wish threepeoples”,indicating of our Latvians Estonians, andLithuanians, and specific and common the “[b]y is collaboration their that claimed Seljamaa Although Document Kaslas, ơ ơ s valstybi m ą džiaugsm As compared with later meetings, the sparse texts of the first conference do not do conference first of the meetings, sparsetexts the later As compared with During a reception with Ulmanis on the way to the first conference of Baltic the of conference thefirst to way the on Ulmanis with areception During Ƴ ơ Taline rengiam Taline njVǐ The BalticNations s id ơ gomis, vykdydams id vykdydams gomis, rugs collaboration of our nations. our of collaboration new stage. Henceforth, a new page is being written in the history of the ʋ ơMą 189. lapkri ǐ .” prasid ơ ą jo 12 d. santarv d. jo 12 man padvigubino tai, kad mano kelion ơ 108 ą jo naujas laikotarpis, prie kurio igyvendinimo tur pirmaj þ This demonstrates that diplomats had adopted the term to denote term to the diplomats hadadopted that This demonstrates io 30 d., Ryga. – S. Lozorai , p. 182. ą ơMą ơ Baltijos Antant Baltijos s ir bendradarbiavimo sutarties režimui režimui sutarties bendradarbiavimo s ir , kuri visados buvo viena iš vadovaujam iš viena buvo visados , kuri 107 ơ . He stated that “[o]n that day [12 s konferencij s Baltijos valstybi þ io kalba, pasakyta per pri ơ yrapirma Lietuvos užsieni ą [30 ǐ th vienyb November,Riga: S. Lozoraitis’ ơ Ƴ jau malonumo prisid sigal ǐ ơ mano krašto ir jos ir krašto mano s id ơ jus. T jus. ơ ơ ja ir praktika mim ǐ ą ą reikal dien pas K. Ulman th ą September tarp trij tarp ǐ ministerio , pp.522- ơ ti ir savo Treaty ǐ Ƴ 44 CEU eTD Collection 110 109 decided workto of the informconference of the asfar possible, desirable as “itthat, was believed Whilstrepresentatives conference. the three countriesthe is mediainformed populaces of LatviaEstonia, andLithuania of proceedingsthe and of results the by public andopinion [...]other it was ofsensitive issue of sovereignty were invariablyarose postponed. the results wherethe matters of discussions the that notes Anderson However, Baltic Entente. ofestablished which set towork in order to present results during nextthe conferencethe of the conference upon. Mixed oftheforward conference wereacted commissions were during course the only if littoral. focused eastern on the pragmatically, and wasnowpredominantly, Entente Baltic the Sea, Baltic entire the of freedom maintenance through safeguardingenvisioned of the of the larger the projectpeace Whilst latter the League. of a Baltic concept abovementioned of the ‘mission’ proclaimed Furthermore, within Seljamaa’s speech similarities can be seen with the earlier Balticof Entente: the self- for formation the as thatacted a catalyst Europe within situation political the underlining Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 83. Kaslas, Consideration was given as to whether, and to what extent to inform the inform to extent what to and whether, to as given was Consideration put various the proposals onstate-clusters statements hypothetical Unlike earlier The BalticNations strength lies in the union. eastern Europe making in a factor succeed shall we which on in way the only the is sideThis offorces. our peace on the scales of Europe. Our with prudence and caution. follow events closely, to calculate coolly,without emotion, and to act affairs, but also in international relations. The world situation forces us to which present conditionsimpose upon nations, notonly in their own of which we are ferventNations, of supporters. League the by We us are upon fullylaid aware of the demands obligations the fulfil to thus and Europe in peace of maintenance tothe contribute isto desire greatest Our We could achieve nothing by separate action; wemustcoordinate , p. 183. 109 110 45 CEU eTD Collection 112 atveju”. Konferencija yra uždara, buvo nuspr buvo uždara, yra Konferencija tai tai Baltijos valstybi of the First Conference of the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian Foreign Ministers], in Butkus, et al. (eds.), reikal 111 6 of course the over – conference second At the thereafter. of Tallinn-Riga-Kaunas order in Tallinn, the second would beheld at Kaunas, the third at Riga, and subsequently in the conference first after the was agreedthat, It Kaunas: in wasconvened second conference explain public. concepttothe this need to apparent wasno thatthere and secondly States’ ‘Baltic asthe and Lithuania indicates two things. Firstly that policymakers were promoting theidea of Estonia, Latvia This exemplification. without States’ ‘Baltic term the with interchangeable is separately threestates ofthe listing releases the in such press that is noteworthy it Furthermore, press. international the to distributed and releases aspress rewritten effectively necessary”. an immediate favourable favourable response. an immediate emerged Balticthe Estonia from hadmaking Latvia dissuade Entente as Lithuania and to treaties. nonaggression to system alliance an of from that mutual beingchangemuch intention assistance; the to Pact Locarno the Eastern discussed of bilateral treaties of individual offers Lithuanian with and Latvia Estonia, approached andLozoraitis. Munters th Crowe, Document -8 Ƴ manoma, apie josdarbus trij josdarbus apie manoma, th ǐ ministr May – once again, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were represented by Seljamaa, In accordance with the protocol agreed upon at the end of firstthe conference, the The month before the second Baltic Entente conference the Soviet Union Soviet the conference Entente Baltic second the before month The The Baltic States and the Great Powers 111 ʋ ǐ pirmosios konferencijos rezium konferencijos pirmosios ǐ 190: 1934 m. lapkri Nevertheless, in subsequent meetings the conference resolutions were resolutions theconference meetings in subsequent Nevertheless, vienyb ơ s id ơ ja irpraktika ǐ šali Ċ ǐ þ sta informuoti spaud informuoti sta io 30 – gruodžio 2 d., Talinas, - Estijos, Latvijos irLietuvos užsienio viešoji nuomon viešoji , p. 526: “Konferencija nusprend ơ [30 , pp.24-25. th ơ November-2 b njWǐ ą ir kt. Apie Konferencijos rezultatus tik b tik rezultatus Konferencijos Apie kt. ir informuojama. Bet turint galvoje, kad galvoje, turint Bet informuojama. nd 112 December 1934, Tallinn: Summary Tallinn: 1934, December The first signs of weakness in ơ , jog pageidautina, kad, kiek nj tinu 46 CEU eTD Collection konferencijai.” valstybi susitarimas. Be to, tuo pa išspresti, vis d indienotvark valstybi (eds.), et al. Butkus, in Entente], Baltic the of conferences second the from delegations Latvian antr 113 to Eastern Europe in a wider sense: Entente with regard to the collective security of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, in addition States’. ‘Baltic Estonia, initial Latvia whichandpreceded the Lithuania haddenoted as the conference is likely The latter of inRigawhich speech particularly the Lozoraitis when considering first. the within utilised itwas also that assume one would conferences subsequent and proceedings; and, given the frequency with which itis used by the delegates in the second in presented presentconference.” the be “results will and that agreement” reachan to managed has conference legal office “a where inthe issue wasresolved “an States” important that Baltic Seljamaa announcing initiative with towards continued proactive attitude the been Nevertheless, realised. everything they had toachieve hoped in of legislature of terms had alignment the not Document ąMą Baltijos Antant ǐ ǐ In his own opening address, Munters In hisMunters was of own withopening address,theconcerned future Baltic the As it can be seen, the term ‘Baltic States’ is employed by Seljamaa within the that noted Seljamaa second conference, atthe address his During opening vienyb juridinio biuro konferencijai pavyko pasiekti susitarim Ċ characteristics: itmust beintentionally independent, also but at the same In sense,this theBaltic policy, inmy opinion, shouldall. have two for solution satisfactory of a provision the and of nations cooperation a permanent nature which can guarantee the widest collective world whichpeace, canonly durable be when constructed on basis of the responsibility notonlyin to regard their owninterests, butalso towards indifference to the Baltic States. Their location imposes on them a No factor with reference to Eastern Europe can be a matter of ʋ ơ , ir, nors visi pirmos užsien lto turime pripažinti, kad atliktas didelis darbas, kuris teikia vilties, kad netrukus bus prieitas 195.1935 m. geguž ơ s id ơ ja ir praktika ơ s konferencij þ iu laiku buvo iškelta kit , p. 539: “M ơ ą s 6d., Kaunas,- Estijos ir Latvijos delegacij [6 th ǐ May 1935, Kaunas: Speeches of the heads of Estonian and ofEstonian heads ofthe Speeches Kaunas: 1935, May reikal 113 njVǐ ǐ ǐ ministr istatymdavyst inžymios [sic] svarbos klausim ǐ konferencijos iškelti klausimai nebuvo galutinai ą ơ . Jos rezultatai bus pateikti dabartinei s suvienodinimas yra v ǐ vadov ǐ , d ơ l kurie Baltijos ǐ ơ kalbos pradedant l intrauktas [sic] Baltijos 47 CEU eTD Collection Affairs, 1997), p. 157. Small States in a Turbulent Environment: The Baltic Perspective 115 tuo pa prasme Baltijos politika, mano nuomone, turi tur pla taikos atžvilgi valstyb Covenant. of the principles the loyal to remained conference the of representatives the though peace, in Ethiopian hadundermined faith conflict League of the asNations lasting avehicle for Italian- discussion. theprincipal invasion The of topic Italianthe was Ethiopia, of by complicated been had which situation, international the fields, in various alignment into legislature their bring to effort concerted their continued they Whilst meeting. Presidentof Latvia andForeign lead theMinister, Latvian delegation and chaired the as waspresent, conferencethe placeAlthough took Munters inLatvia,Ulmanis, the Estonian headedby delegations andLozoraitis.Lithuanian wereonceagain andSeljamaa came to be known as such and as can be seen in the resolutions of conference, third of the resolutions inthe be be seen ascan and as such known came to powers. Entente the with term the of association the because of doubt werecautiousas diplomats of for andno ‘understanding’, expression French using the operation distinct ‘Baltic’ policy of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania within International Relations. a Munters discerns peace.Moreover, lasting maintenance of the to regard republics with three by these be shouldered to ‘mission’ abroader of overture is the there Once again 114 Atis Leji Ibid, p. 540: “Joks elementas, lie þ iausi þ ơ iu laiku ta nepriklausomyb ms, ir j ą Atis Leji At the third convened conference, in Rigaon9 kolektyvin Ƽ did not contain either the word ‘Baltic’. Nor did it contain the word ‘Entente’ word the contain it did Nor ‘Baltic’. word the either contain not did š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity: Chimera or Reality?’, in Atis Leji passive. time independencethat musthave creativea nature and avoid becoming ǐ , kurie bus patvari tikjei bussukurta nuolatinio pob ǐ pad Ƽ ơ Ƴ š has stated althoughthat š hasstated the tis joms uždede atsakomyb tautu bendradarbiavima ir tuoteikdam 114 ơ turipasižymeti k þ ias Ryt ǐ Europos politin ơ Ċ ti du ypatumus: ji turi b ne ne tik savo pa nj rybiniu pob Treaty ofGoodUnderstanding andCo- ą Ċ visiems patenkinam konsteliacij þLǐ (Riga: LatvianInstitute of International nj džiu irvengti supasyv nj interes džio džio pagrindais, laiduodama kuo th nj ą -11 ti apgalvotai nepriklausoma, bet ǐ , negali b atžvilgiu, bet ir visuotin Ƽ th š & Žaneta Ozoli Decemberthe 1935, ą išsprendim nj 115 ti abejingas Baltijos Nevertheless, it ơ ti.” ą . Šia Ƽ a (eds.), ơ s 48 CEU eTD Collection visiškai normaliai”; “yra pasiekusi tikrai konkre valstybi which evaluates the results of the Fourth Conference of the Baltic Entente], in Butkus, et al. (eds.), ketvirtosios Baltijos Antant 118 Konferencijos, Baltijos valstybi nutarimai [9 117 prad pageidautinu, kad Baltijos Antent Butkus, et al. (eds.), rezoliucijos [11 116 in that international international in organisation. that prepare” forefforts theinstallationto Latvian Estonian, andof Lithuanian representation launch diplomatic to decided Conference the of Nations, intheLeague represented itit“[a]cknowledgingthatwas stated resolutions, is Baltic for tobe the desirable Entente the of article third the In rhetoric. political official into entered Entente’ ‘Baltic term the Affairsin Conference, held Tallinn 7 resolutionsthe to given title of official the the example, For States’. fourth ‘Baltic term umbrella the appropriated conference was the “Fourth of Lithuania’ Foreign the Ministers of Latviaand similar,Estonia, instead and Baltic States Ministers as‘Conference such informulations state each of distinction the forewent documents the of Foreign of Thetitling into theofficial proceedings. title the of graduated country, States’ ‘Baltic Munters once again joined Seljamaaand Lozoraitis asthechief his representative of completely normal” and “has achieved real concrete fruit.” real “hasnormal” concrete achieved and completely and strong healthy, is understanding Baltic Lithuanian] and Latvian [Estonian, official statement issued to the press, Lozoraitis asserted that “As you can see, our Document Document Document ơ ti diplomatinius veiksmus, kurie paruošt ǐ With fourth the conference in convened Tallinn between 7 vienyb th May 1936, Tallinn: Fourth Baltic Entente Conference decisions],Butkus, in et al. (eds.), ʋ ʋ ʋ Ƴ th 223. 1936 m. geguž 222. 1936 m. geguž 202. 1935 m. gruodžio 11 d., Ryga. – Tre vykusios 1936 Taline gegužm. ơ ǐ December 1935, Riga: Resolutions of the third conference of the Baltic Entente], in Entente], Baltic ofthe conference third ofthe Resolutions Riga: 1935, December s id vienyb Baltijos valstybi ơ ja ir praktika ơ s id ơ s konferencijos rezultatai [9 ơ ja irpraktika ơ b , p. 616: “Kaip matote, m ơ ơ njWǐ ǐ s 9 d., Talinas. – S. Lozorai s 9 d., Talinas. – Ketvirtosios Baltijos Antant vienyb atstovaujama Taut 116 , p. 612: “Ketvirtosios Pabalt ơ ǐ s id s ơ th þLǐ sm ą -9 lygas min ơ vaisi ja ir praktika ơ th n. 7-9 d., nutarimai.” May 1936,decisions.” May ǐ th .” May 1936, Tallinn: statement of S. Lozoraitis, þ ǐ iosios Baltijos Antant ơ Sajungos Taryboje, konferencija nutaria njVǐ to atstovo k Baltijos santarv , p. 572: “III. Straipsnis: Pripažinusi þ io pareiškimas, kuriame 118 ơ ơ limui.” s Užsieni th ơ ơ yra sveika sveikut -9 s konferencijos ơ ǐ 117 s konferencijos Reikal th May1936,where Moreover, in an Ƴ ǐ vertinti Ministeriu Baltijos ơOơ ir 49 CEU eTD Collection dominated the meeting, Munters stated that stated Munters meeting, the dominated initially War Civil Spanish the of discussions whilst example, For stagnation. initiatives of of period the the hesitant least suchisthe as sixth conference The representative. of Estonian from a pro-‘Baltic’ reintroduction the somewhat initiative benefited the describes “an old fighter for cooperation among the Baltic States.” Anderson was,as Rie headed Estonian Akel,delegation. the ailing fillingin an for Lithuanian, LatviaAugust Rei, whilst and Munters represented again andLozoraitis once 121 120 119 which had recently broken out. broken recently had which War Civil Spanish the of in respect particularly non-intervention, of policy a continue to opted states three the of representatives the Nevertheless, effective. prove might peace concerning means ornotother of arose whether waveredsafeguarding asdiscussions evidently endeavour in faith their current their action, collective preferred they still that declared they although Nations. However, League of the faithful to remained nominally contingent. Latvian the headed Minister, Foreign of office the to promoted now on 9 Entente.” theBaltic about made remarks disparaging viewed byhis contemporaries “as “polono-germanophile”an ardent whohad publicly Akel was that states Anderson Minister. Foreign Estonian asthe replaced Seljamaa had Akel Freidrich initiative, Entente Baltic of the conference fifth By of the time the THE PERIOD OF STAGNATION, 1936-1938 3.2 Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 86. Ibid, p. 86; Kaslas, Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 85. th -10 The sixth conference was convened in Kaunas over the course of 1 in Kaunasthecourse over convened was The sixth conference Whilst international political tensions continued to escalate delegates the to continued international political tensions Whilst th December 1936, Lozoraitis Lithuania, whilstMunters, represented onceagain 1936, December The Baltic Nations 120 , p. 198. 119 At conference, this heldin Riga 121 It wouldappear that st -3 rd July 1937. 50 CEU eTD Collection initiative, noted that noted initiative, example,Lithuania For abroad. particularly Akel, not himself tothe well disposed and Latvia Estonia, of mappingmental the influenced hadcertainly Baltic Entente the that can see we from conference this efforts, their of cooperative of representatives the in fashion. a routine their work carried out delegations the “the poisoned” atmosphere although that Andersonstates was Lozoraitis. Munters and Estonia hisLatvian torepresent Akeland had Lithuanian opposite counterparts, returned Spain. maintainingtheir border tothe support control and strengthening of systems around Though the events in Spain were taking place far away, the three states continued tooffer initiative. the of proceedings official in the usage in common still was States’ ‘Baltic term the Moreover, ispresent. still region, within leasttheir at collaborative action, through Even within this period of stagnation the notion of a duty safeguardto international peace 125 124 123 122 Ibid. p.Ibid, 89. Ibid. p.Ibid, 87. 123 At the seventh conference, convened from from 9 convened conference, seventh the At recognition of the maysituation be. as apositive, stabilizing factor inEurope, whatever,the motives of this the independenceof ourforeign we policy; and that beingare recognized in otherlands has there been for some time an increasing awarenessof behalf of peace and friendship among nations. among friendship and of peace behalf common voice will moreresound loudly when in speaking unison on to develop and strengthen mutualour relationseven more. Then our solidarity. European in setback each and success each It closely only followed have remains for us topart loyally in helping achieve the non-intervention ofpolicy follow andwe the path strategicnormaterial we interests there.we have Nevertheless, played our have chosen andeventsin Spain are taking place far from we us, and have neither 125 122 th -11 124 th December 1937, in December 1937, Tallinn, Despite alternative opinions alternative Despite 51 CEU eTD Collection 127 (eds.), et al. Butkus, in Entente], Baltic ofthe conference seventh the at ministers foreign Lithuanian and Latvian pradedant septint 126 Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as a distinct region. In any event, theparticipantsEstonia,region.In any Lithuania resolved Latviaand asadistinct event, of notion the cultivate to incentive an doubt no was arena international the in recognition Estonia, Latvia Lithuania.and Perceiving that collective hadbrought action them positive were viewed by partiesthird may well have hadinfluence on mental the mapping of the international position of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Such a perception howof they had strengthened Entente of Baltic the efforts cooperative the that concluded conference (i.e. anti-‘Baltic’) mood which had taken root amongst notable figures in Estonia. pro-German the over tension the acknowledging member states; the between relations good of maintenance the on dependent was initiative Entente Baltic the of success the its resources. with accordance regard to thedeterioratinginternational situation, noting that the initiative is operatingin with in significance diminished hasnot Baltic Entente the that he stresses speech where republics; seeing them act in apparent accord with one another. of Estonia, andLithuania who foreigners Latvia were unfamiliar amongst with threethe mapping mental influenced the undoubtedly latter The Relations. aspect of International a stable been as hadrecognised diplomatic channels media and through the broadcast As such, it is evident that the concerted action and spirit of unity that was at least Ibid, pp. 667-668. Document Document Baltijos valstybi Recognising that their collaborative activities were being taken note of abroad, the ofabroad, note taken being were activities collaborative their that Recognising hisof wouldverify opening during Lozoraitis statement the The latter appearto ʋ 246. 1937 m. gruodžio 9 d., Talinas. – Lietuvos ir Latvijos užsienio reikal užsienio Latvijos ir – Lietuvos Talinas. 9d., gruodžio m. 1937 246. ąMą Baltijos Antant ǐ vienyb ơ s id ơ 126 ơ s konferencij ja ir praktika Meanwhile, Munters, duringMeanwhile, Munters, hisspeech that own denoted ą , pp. 666-667. [9 th December1937, Tallinn: Opening speeches of the ǐ ministr 127 ǐ kalbos 52 CEU eTD Collection 131 valstybi (eds.), et al. Butkus, in Entente], Baltic ofthe conference eighth the from speeches ministers pradedant aštunt 130 the Baltic Entente], in Butkus, et al. (eds.), Antant 129 together. that whilst remaining sovereignitremarked moreover, seven first conferences; of Entente’s Baltic the positive success the to their own nations, stressed conference, the the media after to distributed later address, opening Lozoraitis’ the delegates are In delegation. Estonian headed the workingSelter Karl Now, again. once changed had Minister closely Butkus, et al. (eds.), rezoliucijos [11 128 consistency. its through strengthened been has peace universal and that morebecome complicated not conference has last since the “Baltic States” the of situation political the speech hethat opening determined emphasis on close cooperation is accompanied by the incorporative term of ‘Baltic’. the Nevertheless, nations. respective in hadtheir each delegation interest that vested time of the eighth conference, held on 10 the Baltic Ententemust be open, loyal and be inclined to work more closely together. International Relations was becoming a difficult affair. He concluded that the members of such as and chessboard, international the on place taking were developments justified and played a part in the preservation of of in peace. preservation the played apart and justified was non-interference policy theirof that and struggles from ideological remainapart to Ibid, p.Ibid, 693. Document Document Document ơ ǐ s konferencij Muntersin steadfastremained his from assertions previousthe conference. Inhis andWhilst representLatvia and Munters Lozoraitis continued to Lithuania, bythe vienyb 129 ʋ ʋ ʋ the underlining inthis speech, of caution element is There a discernable th 255. 1938 m. birželio 10 d., Ryga.– Latvijos irEstijos užsienio reikal 254. 1938 m. birželio 10 d., Ryga. – S. Lozorai 247. 1937 m. gruodžio 11 d., Talinas. –Septintosios Baltijos Antant ơ ąMą December 1937, Tallinn: Resolutions of the seventh conference of the Baltic Entente], in Entente], Baltic ofthe conference seventh ofthe Resolutions Tallinn: 1937, December s id Baltijos Antant Baltijos valstybi ơ ą ja ir praktika [10 th June 1938, Riga: Opening speech of S. Lozoraitis at the eighth conference of , pp. 692-693. ơ s konferencij ǐ vienyb Baltijos valstybi 130 ơ s id Meanwhile, Selter remarked that every new every remarkedthat day Selter Meanwhile, ą ơ [10 th ja ir praktika -11 th June 1938, Riga: Latvian and Estonian foreign Estonian and Latvian Riga: 1938, June th June in1938 Riga, the Estonian Foreign ǐ vienyb þ , pp. 668-670. io kalba pradedant aštunt 128 ơ s id ơ ja irpraktika ơ s konferencijos ǐ , pp. 690-691. ministr ąMą Baltijos Baltijos ǐ kalbos 131 53 CEU eTD Collection 134 valstybi Estonian foreign ministers’ statements at the end of the conference], inButkus, et[3 al. (eds.), komunikatas ir Lietuvos, Latvijos, Estijos užsienio reikal 133 132 Latvian and Lithuanian cooperation. The ninth conference was held in Kaunas on 1 on Kaunas in held was conference ninth The cooperation. Lithuanian and Latvian Estonian, and Entente Baltic the of supporter aknown Minister; Foreign Lithuanian Selter’s counter motionsMunters continued to andwasjoined byJuozasUrbšys, new the luminary of those Estonians that took a disparaging view of the Baltic Entente. wasa affairs”, any in diplomatic […]without experience financier as “anable describes whoAnderson action. in Selter, join a concerted to andEstonia Latvia Lithuania invited Selter Entente, Baltic the with dispense to inclination an betrayed announcements Leagueother members who belligerence. became victims his of Although impromptu article of the Covenant of the League of Nations, sixteenth the whichobserve boundlonger no her should to comeEstonia tothat the aim proclaimed and of type, Scandinavian declared that Estonia intended toannounce neutrality, herabsolute say is that to the acting together, will also maintain neutrality during wartime. during neutrality maintain also will together, acting by Lithuania, Estonia,that Latvia and Urbšysstated ministers. foreign from three the in newspaper theLithuanian motivation. fresh initiative the gave ninth conference it the stated that peace.Furthermore, a lasting to andcontribute would of states, three the interests tothe corresponds neutrality towards orientation the that stating conference the February aseven month 1939, after A issued the press respite. communiqué was to after rd Ibid, p.Ibid, 714. Document Document Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 89. February 1939, Kaunas: Ninth Baltic Entente conference communiqué and Lithuanian, Latvian and Latvian Lithuanian, and communiqué conference Entente Baltic Ninth Kaunas: 1939, February ǐ The ninth conference fared no better for Selter’s impromptu announcements. forimpromptu Selter’s no fared The ninth better conference Selter speech, hisearlier despite conference, of eighth the course the During vienyb ʋ 267.1939 m. vasario 3 d., Kaunas. – Devintosios Baltijos Antant Baltijos – Devintosios Kaunas. d., 3 vasario m. 267.1939 ơ s id ơ ja ir praktika , pp. 713-714. Lietuvos aidas (Lithuanian Echo) were official statements ǐ ministr 133 ǐ Appearing communiqué with the pareiškimai konferencijai pasibaigus ơ 134 s konferencijos s Meanwhile, Selter Meanwhile, Baltijos 132 st -2 54 nd CEU eTD Collection 138 137 136 135 itwould Nevertheless, representatives. by Estonian of the two adopted stance negative forestalled bythe was region asadistinct Latvia andLithuania mappingEstonia, of enough.” declarations of independence; for “him one such courtesy fivevisityears every would be the of each of anniversary the celebrate to states neighbouring the from statesmen by shouldbe oneconferenceeachyearinstead and,annualof forego they two; should visits there considered; be should matters internal only Lithuania, and Latvia Estonia, between collaboration in future Firstly, initiative. more desirable asomewhat Baltic Entente ambiguous and undesired. maintainedhe disapprovedstressdisapproved of the way that the Baltic Entente wason regarded by other states. Furthermore, the neighbors.” northern his between commondifferences the underplay of to the interestsfrequentEstonian and Latvian delegations were strained andfrosty” while “Urbšys tried hisbest ofuse Estonia, of thefurther along. termLatvia ‘Baltic Baltic had will” Entente been anda “school hadpushedBaltic cooperation of good and Lithuania Entente’, to be considering the the Baltic Entente members. Balticthe Entente of cooperation the deepened’ and ‘strengthened had conference ninth the that affirmed Ibid. Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 90. Ibid. p.Ibid, 715. From this period of stagnation we can see that the construction or the mental the or construction the that see can we stagnation of period this From As in the previous conference Selter had a number of suggestions to make the the between “relations notes Anderson as however, conference the During 138 136 135 Finally, Munters indicated that the nine conferences of of the nineconferences thatthe indicated Munters Finally, 137 Selter announced that he that announced Selter 55 CEU eTD Collection 141 456, 459-460. 140 Edizioni Plus – Pisa University Press, 2006), p. 117. (eds.), Beer &Siegfried Amelang 139 conferences that occurred. Instead, Kazlauskas sums occurred. uphis that conferences analysis: most extensive Entente.” Baltic the studying by scholars text on the Baltic Ententebe) thetemporary loss of independencethe of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. initiative, would hedescribe considered (what to in history, order Baltic figurecomparative of early does not an Oras, byAnts during latterphrasewascoined ‘Balticthe The the processof eclipse’. mentionadopted Entente Baltic the of delegates the which effort concerted the on only thefocus final two question, this enquiry will notventure to offer an interpretation. As such, this section will future)whatthe happenedin andwhy.”1939-1940 problem in the 20 As Eero BALTIC MedijainenECLIPSE, 1939-1940 3.3 states, “the mostdiplomats. the salient amongst opinion of differences contentious were there that observe to public question general the for evidence little been have would there opinions, divergent without effort and still cooperative the depicted mediawhich information to the circulate to continued Entente most centralBaltic As the politics. European of feature asdistinctive a states three the perceiving Baltic hadincommunity international efforts the resulted earlier concerted appear that Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 92. Rein Taagepera, ‘The Struggle for Baltic History’, Baltic for Struggle ‘The Taagepera, Rein Eero Medijainen, ‘The Baltic Question in the Twentieth Century: Historiographic Aspects’, in James S. Anderson observes that the tenth and eleventh conferences “have been overlooked been “have conferences eleventh and tenth the that observes Anderson th century was (and at least for historians, will continue to be, far into Public Power inEurope: Studies inHistorical Transformations 141 Indeed, Kazlauskas’ Journal ofStudies Baltic 139 Due to the scope of such a , Vol. 40, The BalticNations ʋ 4 (2009), pp. 140 (Pisa: , the , 56 CEU eTD Collection a great deal of attention to the matters of economic cooperation and problems in the three in the problems and cooperation of economic matters the to attention deal of a great makeboard, began They progress. to decided toorganisemutual a servicepostal andpaid on representatives all with now conference, The conference. previous the of decisions figures. public Estonian anti-‘Baltic’ of circle particular a and predecessor his of activities December 1939,Piip addressedhis Latvian and Lithuanian opposites apologising for the At inpolitical beginningthe scene. Tallinn conference, convened tenth on of the 7 countries were working on the same page despite the escalating calamity on the European were his Latvian Muntersand Lithuanian andcounterparts, Urbšys. Onceagain threethe 144 143 142 conference. Baltic Union”, replaced the dismissed Selter as the Estonian Foreign Minister by the tenth Ibid. Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 92. Kaslas, The conference began with a report by Urbšys on the implementation of the of implementation the on by Urbšys report a with began conference The Fortunately for the Baltic Entente initiative, Ants Piip, another “old fighter for the for fighter “old another Piip, Ants initiative, Entente Baltic the for Fortunately 144 The BalticNations preserving the balances ofpower in Eastern Europe. become an importanthave elementmight even in military strategic republics considerationBaltic in small three the greed, and intrigues selfish Pusta’s project ofnations did not signify physical ormilitarya powerlarge in1939.However, if Baltic Leaguewords ‘union’and ‘strength’ are synonymous. fortheBaltic ‘Strength’ of 1918 had above not all, to the common conviction shared by all the people thatthe been ruined by constantlyguiding effortsthe governments, oftheir butalso, and perhaps solidarity the to due only not were gains their that realized they Entente, As the three countries looked back over the five productive years of the conference table and in all areas of Baltic domestic and international life. three associated states, the principal aim,had been achieved at the Entente was justified by its accomplishments. Collaboration among the February, 1939, and there was no question that theexistence of the Baltic Nine Conferenceshad held been 1934, andbetween November, 143 Piip was an ardent supporter of cooperation between the three states, as states, three between the of cooperation supporter an ardent Piip was , pp. 206-207. 142 th -8 57 th CEU eTD Collection Baltic Entente], inButkus, et al. (eds.), Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 92. Antant 148 147 pp. 741-742. tenth conference of the Baltic Entente], in Butkus, et al. (eds.), et al. Butkus, in Entente], Baltic the of conference tenth apie apie dešimt id Baltic Entente recommendation foreconomic liaison], in Butkus, et al. (eds.), rekomendacija d 146 Butkus, et al. (eds.), pos 145 prepare apressreport. to resolutions, written than decided,adopting rather war. tocontendwith coordinating efforts their economicthe of of reality problems the predominantly discussed situation by harmonising economic theirstates of and republics. Latvian and Lithuanian nations. The latter provided them with the encouragement to encouragement the with them provided latter The nations. Lithuanian and Latvian Estonian, the between in relations improvements noticeable to relation in satisfaction would betheirlast meetingin face the of turmoil the Europe. throughout erupting what for Urbšys, and by Piip again joined was He initiative. the throughout country representhis only individual to being the againheadedtheLatvian delegation, once 14 and, determined tomaintain neutrality the Finno-Sovietduring War. made for arrangements the channellingsensitive of information; economicand political methods with ofmaintainingcontacts Finland world outside the andSweden; through and ways explored mutual assistance; and cooperation economic close established they ơ Document Document Document See Document th ja ir praktika ơ dži -16 146 ơ ǐ s konferencij Despite their revived cooperative efforts, and in light of the wartime situation, they th protokolai [7 Nevertheless, according to Anderson the representatives expressed their expressed Anderson representatives the to according Nevertheless, from in Riga convened was initiative Entente Baltic the of conference final The March 1940, coinciding with the conclusion of the Finnish Winter War. Munters ąMą 145 ʋ ʋ ʋ Baltijos Antant The latter was partly in relation to a covert effort in relation to the 282.1939 m. gruodžio 11 d., Kaunas. – E. Turausko atmintin 281. 1939 m. gruodžio 8 d., Talinas. – Dešimtosios Baltijos Antant , pp.740-741; Document 280., p.739. ơ l ekonominil ʋ 280.1939 m. gruodžio 7-8 d., Talinas. –Dešimtosios Baltijos Antant Baltijos valstybi ą [11 th -8 th th December 1939, Tallinn: Tenth conference of the Baltic Entente minutes], in minutes], Entente Baltic ofthe conference Tenth Tallinn: 1939, December December 1939, Kaunas: E. Turauskas memo of the tenth conference of the conference tenth ofthe memo Turauskas E. Kaunas: 1939, December ǐ ơ ryši s konferencij ǐ palai kymopalai [8 ǐ vienyb Baltijos valstybi ʋ ą 282. 1939 m. gruodžio 11 d., Kaunas.– E. Turausko atmintin ơ [11 s id th ơ th December 1939, Kaunas: E. Turauskas memo of the ja ir praktika December 1939, Tallinn: Tenth conference ofthe conference Tenth Tallinn: 1939, December ǐ vienyb Baltijos valstybi ơ , pp. 737-739. s id ơ ja ir praktika ơ Baltijos valstybi dešimtapie ǐ vienyb 148 , pp. 741-742; ơ s konferencijos ơ s id ơ 147 s konferencijos ąMą ơ In principal Baltijos ja ir praktika ǐ vienyb ơ s 58 ơ , CEU eTD Collection 153 (eds.), komunikatas” [16 152 151 and annexes],and in Butkus,et al.(eds.), pos 150 92. (eds.), komunikatas” [16 149 observe neutrality. pursue an increase in their economic and cultural cooperation, whilst continuing to students areunanimously students adopted. and scientists of exchanges encourage to as well as nations two other the of languages initiative when it was established due to commonit initiative to regardingtheirlarger was established when concerns due the of years earlier the Resembling Entente. Baltic the of conferences eleventh and tenth effort by concerted undertaken Estonian,the Latvian Lithuanian duringand diplomats the a genuine was there that would It appear matters. and political of purpose economic notion amongst the foreign ministers, not merely a rhetorical tool employed for the itwas anaccepted that This shows discussions. the as ‘Baltic’ throughout referred to still they were nevertheless region; forming adistinct states their of theidea expound ceased. initiative of Baltic Entente the and activities forces, the lostindependence their before, onemonth August during the arrival after Sovietthe of inKaunas 1940. during September in exchange information. of managers and,to order sameministries; the press the cooperation the strengthen affairs; foreign of ministries the of officials leading of Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’, p. 92. Document Document Ibid. See Document Document Document ơ dži Baltijos valstybi Baltijos valstybi ǐ protokolai bei j bei protokolai Due to the wartime situation, it was not practical for the delegations to overtly beconvened would conference Baltic next Entente the agreedthat itwas Finally, ʋ ʋ 289.1940 m. kovo 16 d., Ryga. – Vienuoliktosios “Baltijos santarv “Baltijos Vienuoliktosios – Ryga. d., 16 kovo m. 289.1940 289.1940 m. kovo 16 d., Ryga. – Vienuoliktosios “Baltijos santarv “Baltijos Vienuoliktosios – Ryga. d., 16 kovo m. 289.1940 ʋ th th March 1940, Riga: Eleventh Baltic concord conference communiqué], in Butkus, et al. et Butkus, in communiqué], conference concord Baltic Eleventh Riga: 1940, March March 1940, Riga: Eleventh Baltic concord conference communiqué], in Butkus, et al. et Butkus, in communiqué], conference concord Baltic Eleventh Riga: 1940, March 288.1940 m. kovo 14-16 d., Ryga.– Vienuoliktosios Baltijos Antant ǐ ǐ 149 vienyb vienyb ǐ priedai [14 priedai For example, proposals to create faculty departments for the ơ ơ s id s id ơ ơ ja ir praktika ja ir praktika th Baltijos valstybi -16 th 150 March 1940, Riga: Eleventh Baltic Entente conference minutes conference Entente Baltic Eleventh Riga: 1940, March 152 The meetings convene decideddelegates to regular However, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania formally and Lithuania Latvia However, Estonia, , pp. 765-766. , pp., 765-766; Anderson, ‘Strength and Weakness’,p. ǐ vienyb ơ s id ơ ja irpraktika 153 , pp.760-765. ơ ơ s konferencijos s s konferencijos s ơ s konferencijos 151 59 CEU eTD Collection also played a part in the revival of their collaboration. ministers foreign respective the of Of personal dispositions the course efforts. cooperative motivated have to appears War World Second the of outbreak the neighbours, 60 CEU eTD Collection Taagepera, ‘The Struggle forBaltic History’, Among Baltic Historians in Exile, 1968-1991’, Baltic Entente had done. See forexample Toivo U. Raun, ‘Transnational Contact and Cross-Fertilization of the twentieth century no doubt broadcast the perception of the ‘Baltic States’ to a wider audience that the 154 latter pointlatter view of isfound within remarks the of Andrejs Plakans: who know little of the three countries or their inhabitants. An excellent example of this such idea upon come arehoisted Estonians,the Latvians and byforeignersLithuanians is that view second The not. or them in believed themselves they whether policymakers, by Moreover,suchnotions werecertainly promoted period. during interwar the in least present a certainsense, were a political such ideas,at to degree demonstrated, politically War. World Second followingUnion the active theSoviet outside émigré, Lithuanian and Latvian Estonian, the of fabrication a is it that is first The region. asadistinct andLithuania Latvia Estonia, the to aspect ‘Baltic’ collective idea views who byindividuals predominantto the are opposed a of taken There aretwo &CONCLUSIONS IV:DEDUCTIONS CHAPTER Nevertheless, the industrious activities of the Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian émigré over the course the over émigré Lithuanian and Latvian Estonian, ofthe activities industrious the Nevertheless, individuality, and particularism and the few in any of the lands;three the themes locally have been distinctiveness, historians. There is no endemic tradition of tradition endemic no is There historians. peopleideal. Itisnot surprising therefore that books[…] –grouping these three regional that realize to strive not did if they duty sacred a in derelict and their states together – tend to come from Baltic-area they and their homelands constitute really a have chafing been the at idea –always propounded outsidersby – that nineteenth century. Ever stratum from within itssince, own ranks only in the half second of the these three smallliving on easternthe littoral ofsets theBalticpeoples Sea –each developed an intellectual adjacent of three educatedthe – Lithuanians and personLatvians, Estonians, Journal of Baltic Studies Journalof Baltic Studies Baltic-area Baltic region histories that doexist , Vol., 40, and that they were they that and , forthcoming 2012; and, Rein and, 2012; forthcoming , historical writing historical 154 ʋ 4 (2009),pp. 451-464. As this enquiry has 61 CEU eTD Collection Teacher 155 Finland within the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact as a ‘Baltic’ state. by dissipated most is late1930s.Theexample the conspicuous latter the of thelisting of International Relations 1920s.Such throughout the yetalternative notions hadnot suitably oratleastinprevalent, expounded, order toremain feature of a prominent inforgotten early the popular knowledge. However, during twentieth century they were examples These incorporated. were enquiry this of states titular of three the than more which the alternativeinto as the‘Baltic historical mental particular States’ obscure widespread geographies, mental mapping commonly ofreferred to as the ‘Baltic countries’ in the present‘Baltic’ day. could in the also present be Finlandand attimes incorporated in andPoland.instances Moreover, particular term the used dayto designateare fluid –was conventions capitalisation day in present states’ ‘Baltic styled increasingly near all those – ‘Baltic the States’ term interwar theperiod, and throughout indeed1934, thereafter states Entente, against which meaning idiomdistinct temporal tothe which to was founded. Prior flankedLithuania1934; priortoafter which a discernable political initiative, namely Baltic the the Balticof Sea,the term more ‘Baltic States’ to states. national of their respective were founders collectively by individuals whowerenot only of policymakers the their day,in butalso many respects denote the republics werepromoted notions thatthese hasdemonstrated this enquiry latter, the to With regard of Estonia, Latvia and Andrejs Plakans, [untitle review of , Vol. 39, The often inaccurate usage of retroactively naming Estonia, Latvia Lithuania and namingLatvia Estonia, usage inaccurate retroactively of The often theproblematic retroactive usage has specifically, highlighted More enquiry this national histories bound together between two covers. are very recent products, and for the most part present three separate ʋ 1(2005), p.133.Emphasis as in original. The History of the Baltic States , by O’Connor],Kevin 155 The History 62 CEU eTD Collection andherself Lithuania hassince with reconciled since Poland, which 1990s the twoother nationsin day the – whilst ithas negativepresent for connotations Estonians termthat ‘Baltic’ hasonly significantmeaning for Latvians – ‘sandwiched’ between the is stated itoften example, For matter. different altogether are an such concept to a states not torequire clarification.popular Of course opinion and public reaction three the within notion soas suitably Finlandindicates this that pervasive was for example andPoland – Latvia and exemplification Lithuania without – thatis tosay, themfrom distinguishing denote Estonia, ‘Balticinformationbroadcasting the public theterm utilising to States’ to its sometime before initiative the Moreover, began establishedactivities. convention an already was as‘Baltic’ republics three these categorising that suggests Entente inauguration Baltic the after Estonia,of the Lithuania Latvia and collectively denote beingforged notably than earlier initiativethe itself. haveappears begun in to is that link a chain merely Balticasingle Entente respect the in this Nevertheless, suchaperception. promotion officially that obviously quite one Lithuania as the ‘Balticand Latvia States’, Estonia, of mapping asmental itthe in has played been Entente Baltic the demonstratedwhich role the of in the previous chapter, was this enquiry, was an attempt tosafeguard the sovereignty of their three nations. In respect Their formotivation as doing withindenoted so, the cited throughout secondaryliterature nations. three those of ministers foreign the of discourse and rhetoric in the promoted Lithuania a geo-politicaldistinct entity comprising present and was both publicly The swift, or rather immediate, adoption of the term ‘Baltic States’ in order to This hasenquiry demonstrated that idea the of republicsthe of Latviaand Estonia, 63 CEU eTD Collection Geographies’, Mental ofEstonian Formation the On Space? Nordic Common a or Provinces Baltic Land”: “Yule of Perspective Reality?’, in Atis Leji European University Press, 1999), p. 7, 156 represented Lithuania’s so-called ‘path to Europe’. ‘pathto Lithuania’sso-called represented that the term ‘Baltic’ acquired an additional political connotations after the First World First the after connotations political additional an acquired ‘Baltic’ term the that peace through sustaining the freedom of Sea.With Baltic the in latter the mind,it appears the safeguardingBalticinternational envisaged asameansof to contributing League; Europe. The notion of this role bears a striking resemblance to that of the earlier proposed also todo their partin maintainingthe oflasting peace; at least within their own sector of mission of overtone safeguard not only a duty or sovereignty buttheirto own respective present ever wasan there effort concerted their of revival ineffective before an stagnation internationally. both domestically and influencing public, geography the wider the mental of aimed political at effort aconcerted it nevertheless was perceived although region, the construct not did initiative the Entente, Baltic the to prior emerged States’ ‘Baltic the constituting states three these of notion As the media. the through public the to broadcast nevertheless was it concept a such with accord in been have not may policymakers of Estonia, Latvia andLithuania, propagated idea. the Whilst individual the views personal approaches. methodological and theoretical alternative requiring matters different entirely are period, interwar inday the and during both present the States’, public theideaof ‘Baltic the response to Endre Bojtár, Endre Furthermore, although Furthermore, although initiativethe a beganenthusiastically and of entered period of republics the of notion the creating not whilst initiative, Entente Baltic The (Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs, 1997), pp. 159-160; Pärtel Piirimäe, ‘The Idea Baltic Worlds Foreword tothe Past: A Cultural History of the Baltic People Ƽ š & Žaneta Ozoli , Vol. 4, ʋ 4(2011), pp.36-39. n Ƽ . 4; Atis Leji a (eds.), Small States in a Turbulent Environment: The Baltic Ƽ š, ‘The Quest for Baltic Unity: Chimera or 156 Nevertheless, such questions of (Budapest: Central 64 CEU eTD Collection temporal temporal coordinate. as a occupy ideologically to attempted initiative Entente Baltic the which War; one 65 CEU eTD Collection INITIATIVE, 1934-1940 INITIATIVE, APPENDIX I: THE CONFERENCES OF THE BALTIC ENTNETE Conference VIII VII III IX VI IV XI ʋ II V X I Latvia Riga, Lithuania Kaunas, Estonia Tallinn, Estonia Tallinn, Lithuania Kaunas, Lithuania Kaunas, Estonia Tallinn, Latvia Riga, Latvia Riga, Estonia Tallinn, Location Latvia Riga, 10 Friday, 1 Thursday, 7 Thursday, 7 Thursday, 6 Monday, 14 Thursday, 1 Wednesday, 9 Thursday, 9 Wednesday, 9 Monday, 30 Friday, Start Date st th th th st th th th July 1937 February 1939 th May 1936 December 1939 December May 1935 th th December 1937 December 1936 December 1935 December June 1938 March 1940 November1934 3 Saturday, 9 Saturday, 8 Friday, 11 Saturday, 8 Wednesday, Wednesday, 2 Sunday, End Date 16 Saturday, 2 Thursday, 11 Saturday, 10 Thursday, 11 rd th th th nd nd May 1936 December 1939 December th May 1935 th th th th July 1937 December 1934 December February 1939 June 1938 March 1940 1937 December 1936 December 1935 December Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: August Rei Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Karl Selter Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Julius Seljamaa Lithuania: Juozas Urbšys Juozas Lithuania: Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Ants Piip Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Julius Seljamaa Estonia: Julius Seljamaa Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Julius Seljamaa Principal Representatives Lithuania: Juozas Urbšys Juozas Lithuania: Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Ants Piip Urbšys Juozas Lithuania: Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Karl Selter Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Friedrich Akel Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: Vilhelms Munters Estonia: Friedrich Akel Lithuania: Stasys Lozoraitis Latvia: K Ɨ rlis Ulmanis 66 CEU eTD Collection Document Document Esthonia Treaty ofGoodUnderstanding andCo-operation PRIMARY SOURCES BIBLIOGRAPHY Lithuanian andSoviet Government ofRussia– Peace Treatyand Protocol, signed at Latvia andRussia of -Treaty Peace, doneatMoscow,completed andsigned and atRiga, of of Governmentthe of LatviaLithuania to andEstonia, which to defineproposes more Qơ beadradarbiavimopricipus ir r memorandumas Latvijai ir Estijai, kuriame si kuriame Estijai, ir Latvijai memorandumas policy 93-95 links]: Scandinavian union with defenceassociated and economiccoordinated andforeign diplomat to the Paris Peace Conference, [Kaarel] R. Pusta, calling for aBaltic and saitaispoliticos [November-December 1918,Paris: Article of Estonian delegation ir Skandinavijos šali prie Paryžiaus Taikos konferencijos nario R.Pustos straipsnis, ragin http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1934/227.html accessed(Last 24/11/2011) ™ http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1920/2.html(Last accessed15/052012) Moscow, 12 http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1920/63.html(Lastaccessed 15/052012) 11 http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/LNTSer/1922/92.html accessed(Last 15/052012) February 1920 February vienai iš j th Vilniaus Vilnius. universitetas. 2008 Practice of Unity the 1918-1940].Lietuvos istorijosof institutas, Baltic States: the Baltijos valstybi From Butkus, Z., August1920 [sic] ʋ ʋ 181. 1934m.Kaunas. balandžio25., –Lietuvos vyriausyb 2.1918 m.lapkritis-gruodis, Paryžius.– Estijos diplomato, jos delegacijos and SovietRepublicof Russia –Peace Treaty, signedatTartu, 2 th ǐ July1920 , turin : LNTSer92; 11 LNTS 30. Online at : LNTSer 63; 2 LNTS 195. Online at þLǐ ǐ ǐ vienyb sajung ý specifini eslovas Laurinavi : LNTSer 2; 3 LNTS 105. Online at ơ ą s id , susiet nj pintis, kadBaltijospintis, šalys savoveiksmais nepakenkt ǐ ơ problem ja irpraktika 1918-1940 metais ą gynybos, þ ius, Rimantas Miknys & Vytas Žalys (eds.), ǐ [25 nj . Online at loma tiksliau apibr tiksliau loma th nj April April 1934, Kaunas: Memorandum kioir užsienio koordinuotos ơ žti tarpusavio žti [The Idea and Idea [The Ċ ơ s sukurti Baltijos s nd ǐ 67 CEU eTD Collection Document Document Document Document Document Document Document Document conference of 571-573 conference of Entente]: Baltic the konferencijos rezoliucijos [11 conferences of of conferences 538-540 Balticthe Entente]: speeches of the heads of Estonian and Latvian delegations from the second kalbos pradedant antr Latvian Latvian and Lithuanian Foreign Ministers]: 524-526 2 Lietuvos užsienioreikal Tallinn]: 522-523 travelling to forthcomingthe firstconference of Balticthe Ententetobe heldin [30 pas K. Ulman K. pas to theVilnius question]: 518 specific inproblem article threeof unitythe and cooperation appliesagreement only 1934, Geneva: Secretdeclaration of Lithuania, Latvia andEstonia explaining that the straipsnyje minimos specifin minimos straipsnyje deklaracija, aiškinanti, kadSantarv aiškinanti, deklaracija, 507-515 conference of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania [II] for the treaty of the three countries”]: sudarymui, [29 protokolas” parengiamosios konferencijos, skirtos trij preparatory conference of 505 of Entente]: Baltic the preparatory conference first the of results the of notice Agency] News [Lithuanian “ELTA” Kaunas: Baltijos Antant the preparatory conference of of preparatory the Baltic504-505 the conference Entente]: 1934, Kaunas: Lithuanian and Latvianopening speechesof delegationthe heads in kalbos pirmojoje Baltijos Antant Baltijos pirmojoje kalbos jeopardise one withanother theirspecific or actions problems]: 502-503 ensure ofmutual precise cooperation Balticand to principles donot the that countries nd December1934,Tallinn: Summary Firstthe of Conference Estonian,the of th November, Riga: S.Lozoraitis’ speech during the reception of K. Ulmanis, ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ 202. 1935 m. gruodžio 11d., Ryga. –Tre 195. 1935m. geguž 190. 1934m.lapkri 189. lapkri 187.1934 m. rugs 185.1934 m. rugpj 183. 1934 m.liepos 10 d., Kaunas. –“Eltos” pransešimas apie pirmosios 182. 1934 m.liepos 7d.Kaunas. –Lietuvos ir Latvijos delegacij Ƴ vykstant vykstant ơ s sudarymo konferencijosparengiamosios [10 rezultatus þ ąMą io 30d., Ryga. –S. Lozorai ǐ Ƴ Baltijos Antant Taline rengiam Taline ministr th ơ August 1934, Riga: “Protocol August1934, Riga: “Protocol to preparatory the ơ njþ jo12 d., Ženeva. –Slapta Latvijos Lietuvos, ir Estijos s problemos lie s problemos th þ ơ io30 –gruodžio 2d., Talinas, -Estijos, Latvijos ir DecemberRiga: 1935, of Resolutions thirdthe ioRyga.29 d., –“Latvijos, Estijos ir Lietuvos[II] s 6d.,Kaunas, -Estijos ir Latvijos delegacij ơ ǐ s sudarymo parengiamojoje konferencijoje [7 konferencijoje parengiamojoje sudarymo s pirmosios konferencijos rezium ơ s irtre sutarties bendradarbiavimo ơ ą ǐ s knoferencij pirmaj šali þ ia tikVilniaus klausim ia tikVilniaus ǐ bendradarbiavimo sutarties ą þ Baltijos Antant Baltijos io kalba, pasakyta per pri þ iosios Baltijos Antant ą [6 th May 1935, Kaunas: ơ ơ s konferencij [30 ą [12 þ iajame th th November- th July 1934, ơ September ǐ ǐ s ơ vadov vadov mim th ą July ą ǐ ǐ 68 CEU eTD Collection Document Document Document Document Document Document Document Document Document Document memo of the tenth conference of the Baltic Entente]: 741-742 dešimt liaison]: 740-741 economic for recommendation Entente Baltic the of conference Tenth Tallinn: konferencijos rekomendacija d of of minutes]: Baltic 737-739 the Entente konferencijos pos ministers’ statements at the end of end atthe 713-715 statements conference]: of the ministers’ Entente conference communiqué andLithuanian, Latvianand foreign Estonian pareiškimai konferencijai pasibaigus [3 konferencijos komunikatas ir Lietuvos,Latvijos, užsienio Estijos reikal the Baltic 692-693 the Entente]: of from eighth speeches conference the foreign ministers Riga: Estonian and Latvian ministr Lozoraitis atthe eighth 690-691 conference of Balticthe Entente]: aštunt konferencijos rezoliucijos [11 conference of 668-670 conference of Entente]: Baltic the the seventh conference of the Baltic Entente]: 666-668 1937, Tallinn: Openingspeeches of Latvianthe Lithuanianand foreign ministers at ministr Conference of Conference of Balticthe 615-616 Entente]: Tallinn: statement of S. Lozoraitis, which evaluates the results of the Fourth Ƴ konferencijos nutarimai [9 decisions]: 612-615 vertinti ketvirtosios Baltijos Antant ketvirtosios vertinti ąMą ąMą ǐ ǐ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ ʋ kalbosaštunt pradedant kalbosseptint pradedant Baltijos Antant Baltijos Baltijos Antant 282. 1939 m. gruodžio 11d., Kaunas. – E. Turausko atmintin 281. 1939 m. gruodžio 8d., Talinas. –Dešimtosios Baltijos Antant 280. 1939 m. gruodžio 7-8 d., Talinas. –Dešimtosios Baltijos Antant 267. 1939 m. vasario 3d., Kaunas. –Devintosios Baltijos Antant 255. 1938m. birželio10 d.,Ryga. –Latvijos ir Estijos užsienioreikal 254. 1938m. birželio10 d.,Ryga. –S.Lozorai 247. 1937m.11 d., gruodžio Talinas.– Septintosios Baltijos Antant 246. 1937m.9 d., gruodžio Talinas. –Lietuvos ir Latvijos užsienioreikal 223. 1936 m. geguž 222. 1936 m. geguž ơ dži ǐ protokolai protokolai [7 ơ ơ s konferencij s konferencij th May 1936, Tallinn: Fourth May1936,Tallinn:Baltic Fourth Conference Entente th ơ ơ ơ December 1937, Tallinn: Resolutions of the seventh s 9 d., Talinas. –S. Lozorai s 9 d., Talinas. –Ketvirtosios Baltijos Antant l ekonomini ąMą ąMą Baltijos Antant Baltijos ơ Baltijos Antant Baltijos th s konferencijos rezultatai rezultatai [9 s konferencijos -8 ą rd ą [10 th [11 February February 1939, Kaunas: Ninth Baltic December 1939,Tallinn: Tenthconference December th ǐ th June1938,Riga: Openingspeech of S. ryši December 1939, Kaunas: E.Turauskas ǐ palaikymo[8 ơ ơ s konferencij s konferencij þ iokalba pradedant þ io pareiškimas, kuriame th th ą December 1939, ą May1936, [10 [9 th th December ǐ ơ June1938, ministr apie ơ ơ s ơ s s ơ ơ s ǐ ǐ s 69 ǐ CEU eTD Collection Bojtár, E. Berger, P. L. & Thomas Luckmann. ______. The Baltic Entente: Phantom or Reality?. V. Stanley Vardys & Romauld J. Anderson, E. The Baltic Entente, 1914-1940: Its Strength & Weakness. John Hiden & Adler, Seizing E. the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics. SECONDARY LITERATURE Balkelis, T. ______. Towards Balticthe Union: TheInitial Phase. ______. Towards Balticthe 1920-27. Union ______.Towards Balticthe TheInitial Entente: Phase. Jüri G. Poska(ed.) ______. Towards Balticthe Union, 1927-1934. Document Document Document European European University 1999 Press. Budapest. Sociology ofKnowledge Misiunas (eds.) Stockholm. 1988:79-99 Wars (eds.) Loit Aleksander JournalInternational of Relations 765-766 conference communiqué]: konferencijos komunikatas” [16 komunikatas” konferencijos Stockholm. 1965:41-61 Mélanges dédiés à Kaarel R.Pusta University Press.University PA Park, & London. 1987:126-135.notes: 217-219 Eleventh Eleventh Baltic Ententeconference minutes and annexes]:760-765 konferencijos pos conference communiqué]: 765-766 conference communiqué]: konferencijos komunikatas” [16 komunikatas” konferencijos . Studia Baltica Stockholmiensia. 3. Centre for Baltic Studies, University of Foreword tothePast: ACulturalHistory ofthe Baltic People ʋ ʋ ʋ The Making of ModernLithuania 289. 1940 m. kovo 16 d., Ryga. –Vienuoliktosios “Baltijos santarv 288. 1940 m. kovo 14-16 d., Ryga. –Vienuoliktosios Baltijos Antant 289. 1940 m. kovo 16 d., Ryga. –Vienuoliktosios “Baltijos santarv The BalticStates in Peace andWar ơ dži ǐ protokolai bei j The Baltic in International Relations between theTwo World . Anchor Books. New York, NY. 1967 th th The SocialConstruction ofReality: A Treatise inthe March 1940, Riga: Eleventh Baltic concord March 1940, Riga: Eleventh Baltic concord . 3:3. 1997:319-363 . Publications du Comité des amis de K. R. Pusta. ǐ priedai priedai [14 Lituanus . Routledge. London& 2009 New York. Lituanus . 12:2.1966:30-56 Lituanus .The Pennsylvania State th . 13:1.1967:5-28 -16 th March1940,Riga: .14:1.1968: 17-39 .14:1.1968: . Central European Pro Baltica: ơ ơ s s ơ s 70 CEU eTD Collection Kaslas, B. J. Kasekamp, A. ______. Jurkynas, M. Brotherhood Reconsidered: Region-Building in the Baltics. Jurg Hackmann, J. From ‘Object’ to ‘Subject’: The Contribution of Small Nations to Region- Graham, M. W. The Recognition of Baltic States in the Configuration of American Gould. P. & Rodney White. Gerner, K. The Baltic States – How Many?: A Story of a Historical Coincidence. Feldmanis, I&Stranga, A. Eidintas, A. Eidintas, Crowe, D. M. Crowe, Bumblauskas, A. The Heritage of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: Perspectives of Brüggemann, K.Leaving ‘Baltic’ the Statesand ‘Welcome toEstonia’: Re-regionalising Briedis, L. Liberty International andRelations Political Science, University. Vilnius 2007 Vilnius. Baltic Studies Lithuanian Historical Society.IL. 1985 Chicago, Building in Eastern North Europe. Publications duComité des amis deK.R. Stockholm. Pusta. 1965:137-146 Diplomacy. Jüri G. Poska (ed.) Worlds of International Affairs. Riga. 1994 enciklopedij Westview Press. Boulder, CO.1993 Duchy ofLithuania Historical Consciousness. Grigorijus Potašenko (ed.) 2003: 343-360 Estonian Identity. ơ la, C.R. How How Deep is Your Love?TheBalticBrotherhood Re-Examined . 4:4. 2011: 52-54 . 4:4. . Euramerica Press. Pittston, PA. 1976 Vilnius: CityofStrangers Lithuanian Emigrationto the UnitedStates: 1868-1950 The Baltic Nations: Quest The for Regional IntegrationandPolitical Lithuania and theUnited States: TheEstablishment ofState Relations The Baltic States and the GreatPowers: ForeignRelations,1938-1940 A Historyofthe Baltic States ǐ leidybos institutas. Vilnius. 2003 . 35:1. 2004: 1-31 European Review European Review History – of Revue européenne d’Histoire . Aidai. 2002:7-44 Vilnius. The Destiny of the Baltic Entente, 1934-1940 Mental Maps Pro Baltica:Mélanges dédiés à Kaarel R.Pusta . Central . Central European 2009 University Budapest. Press. Journal of Baltic Studies . Routledge. London. 2002 . Palgrave Macmillan. Basingstoke. 2010 The Peoples oftheGrand . 33:4.2002: 412-430 . Mokslo ir Mokslo . . Institute of . Institute . Latvian Institute Journal of Baltic . 10:2. . . . 71 CEU eTD Collection Medijainen, E.Article 5: Permanent Neutrality in the Tartu Peace Treaty, 1920. Lynch, K. Leji ______. The Dancing Conference of Bulduri: A of Clash Alternative Regional Futures. ______. The Baltic______. Leagueandthe Sovereignty. Ideaof Limited ______. Sovereignty ______. Sovereignty Redefined: Baltic Cooperation and Limits the of National Self- Lehti, M. Laurinavi Lane, T. Kiaupa, Z. Kirss, T. & Rutt Hinrikus (eds.), Krapauskas, V. Krapauskas, ______. Recent Trendsin Lithuanian Historiography. Kazlauskas, B. of BalticStudies Institute Institute of International Affairs. Riga.1997: 147-183 (eds.) Diversity andInclusion Martynas Housden& David J.Smith (eds.) Geschichte Osteuropas Determination. Lang. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, New York, Paris & Vienna. 1999 Region andSmallState Sovereignty inthe the Aftermath ofFirst World War inImagination Baltics.the Rodopi.Amsterdam 2004: & NewYork. 109-118 Lithuanian Jews Nikžentaitis, Stefan Schreiner & Darius Stali Budapest. 2009 Budapest. 23/03/2012) http://www.lituanus.org/2010/10_4_01%20Krapauskas.htmlaccessed (Last Journal ofArts& Sciences Lithuanian Historicism Ƽ š, A. The Quest for Baltic Unity: Chimera or Reality? Atis Leji Lithuania: Stepping Westwards þ A Baltic Leagueas a Construct oftheNew Europe: EnvisioningaBaltic Small States ina Turbulent Environment: The BalticPerspective The Image of the City ius, ius, The History ofLithuania ý L’Entente Baltique Nationalism andHistoriography: The Case ofNineteenth-Century . Lithuanian General Aspects of Domestic Policy,Alvydas 1918-1940. Cooperation andConflict . 41:2.2010: 201-214 . On the Boundary of Two Worlds: Identity, Freedom, and Moral . Neue Folge. 45:3. 1997: . NeueFolge. 45:3. 450-465 . East European Monographs. Boulder, CO. 2000 . Rodopi. Amsterdam . Rodopi. Amsterdam & 2011:71-94New York. . 56:4. 2010. Online. 56:4. at . MIT Press. Cambridge, MA. 1960 Estonian Life Stories . Librairie du Recueil Sirey. Paris. 1939 . Baltoslankos. Vilnius. 2005 . Routledge. London & New York. 2001 . 34:4. 1999: 413-443 Forgotten Pages in BalticHistory: nj nas (eds.) Central European University Press. Lituanus: LithuanianQuarterly The Vanished World of Jahrbücher für Jahrbücher Ƽ š & Žaneta Ozolina . Latvian . Peter Journal 72 CEU eTD Collection Smith, D.J. Searle, J. R. O. Rutter, Rodgers, H. I. Raun, T. U. Transnational Contacts and Cross-Fertilization Among Baltic Historians in Rauch, G.von. Plakans, A. Pabriks, A. & Aldis Purs. Aldis A.& Pabriks, O’Connor, K. Neumann, I.B. Plakans, A. [untitle review of Piirimäe, P.The Idea of “Yule Land”: Baltic Provinces or a Common Nordic Space? On Piip, A.The Baltic States as a Regional Unity. Misi ______. The Baltic in Question Twentieththe Century: Historiographic Aspects. James New York. 2001 Estonia Books. Hamden,1975 CT. Exile, 1968-1991. London. 1974 Cambridge. 2011 History Teacher Building Approach Building Vilnius. 2008 Little Nation:Lithuania’s ImageCampaignof 1919 inthe U.S. the Formation of Estonian Mental Geographies. Mental Estonian of Formation the Science Political andSocial 2001 York. Transformations S. Amelang& Siegfried Beer (eds.) nj nas, R. The New States & Baltic Future:their Anaccountof Lithuania,Latviaand . Methuen & CO. Ltd.London. 1925 A ConciseHistory ofthe Baltic States Estonia: and Independence European Integration The SocialConstruction of Reality Didi mažatauta: Liutuvos The History ofthe Baltic States Search for Security:Search for A Studyin Baltic Diplomacy, 1920-1934 The Baltic States: TheYears Independence,of 1917-1940 Regions in International Relations Theory: a theCasefor Region- . 39:1. 2005: 133-134 . 39:1. . Edizioni –PisaPlus University Press.Pisa. 2006:109-12 Journal ofBalticStudies . NUPI, Research Report. Oslo. 2002 Latvia: The Challenges Latvia: of Change The History oftheBaltic States . 168. 1933: 171-177 Public Power inEurope:Studies Historical Ƴ vaizdžio kampanija JAV1919metais/A Great .Greenwood Press. Westpoert, CT. 2003 Annals oftheAmerican AcademyofAnnals . Forthcoming 2012 . Free Press. New York, NY. 1995 . Cambridge University Press. Baltic Worlds . Routledge. London New , by Kevin O’Connor]. . Routledge. London & . 4:4. 2011: 36-39 . 4:4. Bonus animus. Bonus . C. Hurst & Co. . Archon The 73 CEU eTD Collection ______. The Fragmentation of ‘Lithuanianthe Race’: The Latvian inNation Worksthe Wollen, J. M. A Forgotten Episode: The Idea of a Latvian-Lithuanian State, c.1885-1920. Weberman, D.The Nonfixity of the Historical Past. Stradi Taagepere, R.TheTaagepere, Struggle Baltic for History. âþ ______. Establishment of an Intellectual Entente in the Baltic States. Talavs Jundzis (ed.) Steiner, Z. S. Vytell,Dr. Jonas M.V.Šli Varslav erbinskis,Lookingfor V. Neighbours: Origins andDevelopment of Latvian Rhetoric Vilnius, Lithuania. March 30 2012 andFolklore. Literature of Lithuanian Institute the of conference international and eight regions: Baltic, National and Regional Identity in Literature and Culture] regionai: baltiška,tautin of Lithuanian Intellectuals, 1885-1920.Paperpresented at the Culture]. and Literature in Identity Forthcoming 2012 Regional and National Baltic, regions: baltiška, tautin Laura Laurušait 1997: 749-768 http://www.lituanus.org/1991_1/91_1_07.htm University Press. Oxford.2005 158-164 Politics: Northern andBalticExperiences on Nordic ‘Closeness. Marko Lehti & David J. Smith (eds.) Loeber the 21 and Opportunities in theContextof International Co-operation attheBeginningof The BalticStates atHistorical Crossroads: Political, Economic andLegal Problems Scientific Journalof RigaTechnical University University of Stockholm. Stockholm. 1988:43-58 the Two World Wars John Hiden & Aleksander Loit (eds.) 464 August Loeberandon the Occasionthe of 75 Ƽ š, J.Beginnings of Intellectual the Entente of Balticthe (1920-1935-1940). States Ɨ ns, A. Baltic Alliance and International Politics in the First Part of the 1920s. st . Latvian Academy of Sciences. Riga. 2001:291-314 Century: ACollection Scholarlyof Articles: Published inMemoryof Senator The Lights that Failed: European International History, 1919-1933 ơ ơ , regionin & Silvestras Gaiži . Studia Baltica Stockholmiensia. 3. Centre for Baltic Studies, nj pas (1861-1944). pas ơ ơ , regionin savimon ơ ơ nj savimon literat nas (eds.) The Baltic in International Relations between . Frank Cass Publishers. London. 2003: Lituanus Journal ofBalticStudies nj roje ir kult th ơ (Last accessed 24/04/2012) Birthday ofProfessor Dietrich André literat . 18. 2011:11-18 . 18. Dvi tautos ir aštuoni regionai: The Review The Review Metaphysics of .37:4. 1991. Online.37:4. at nj roje ir kult nj roje Post-Cold War Identity [Two nations and eight Dvi tautosir aštuoni nj roje . 40:4. 2009: 451- [Two nations . 50:4. . Oxford 74 CEU eTD Collection Žiugžda, R. Lithuania in International Relations in the 1920s. John Hiden &Aleksander Hiden John 1920s. in the Relations in International Lithuania R. Žiugžda, Žalys, V.The Return of Lithuania to the European Stage. Edvardas Tuskenis (ed.) Stockholm. 1988:61-75 Baltica Stockholmiensia. 3. Centre for Baltic Studies, University of Stockholm. Loit (eds.) Martin’s Press. NewYork, NY.1999: 59-110 Lithuania inEuropeanPolitics: The Years the Firstof 1918-1940 Republic, The Baltic in International Relationsbetween theTwo World Wars . St. . Studia 75