Exiles and Constituents: Baltic Refugees and American Cold War Politics, 1948-1960
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Exiles and Constituents: Baltic Refugees and American Cold War Politics, 1948-1960 Jonathan H. L’Hommedieu A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Turku in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate of Social Sciences in the Department of Contemporary History Turku 2011 Serial: Humaniora B 338 ISBN 978-951-29-4811-6 ISSN 0082-6987 Abstract Jonathan H. L’Hommedieu: Exiles and Constituents: Baltic Refugees and American Cold War Politics, 1948-1960 This dissertation explores the complicated relations between Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian postwar refugees and American foreign policymakers between 1948 and 1960. There were seemingly shared interests between the parties during the first decade of the Cold War. Generally, Eastern European refugees refused to recognize Soviet hegemony in their homelands, and American policy towards the Soviet bloc during the Truman and Eisenhower administrations sought to undermine the Kremlin’s standing in the region. More specifically, Baltic refugees and State Department officials sought to preserve the 1940 non-recognition policy towards the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States. I propose that despite the seemingly natural convergence of interests, the American experiment of constructing a State-Private network revolving around fostering relations with exile groups was fraught with difficulties. These difficulties ultimately undermined any ability that the United States might have had to liberate the Baltic States from the Soviet Union. As this dissertation demonstrates, Baltic exiles were primarily concerned with preserving a high level of political continuity to the interwar republics under the assumption that they would be able to regain their positions in liberated, democratic societies. American policymakers, however, were primarily concerned with maintaining the non-recognition policy, the framework in which all policy considerations were analyzed. I argue that these two motivating factors created unnecessary tensions in American policy towards the Baltic republics in the spheres of psychological warfare as well as exile unity in the United States and Europe. Despite these shortcomings, I argue that out of the exiles’ failings was born a generation of Baltic constituents that blurred the political legitimacy line between exiles who sought to return home and ethnic Americans who were loyal to the United States. These Baltic constituents played an important role in garnering the support of the United States Congress, starting in the 1950s, but became increasingly influential after the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, despite the seemingly less important role Eastern Europe played in the Cold War. The actions of the Baltic constituents not only prevented the Baltic question from being forever lost in the memory hole of history, but actually created enough political pressure on the State Department that it was impossible to alter the long-standing policy of not recognizing the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States. ii Acknowledgments To say that completing a doctoral dissertation is never full proof and impossible without plenty of support from a litany of individuals is as much a truth as it is a cliché. While it is impossible to give ample credit where it is due to everyone over the past decade, I would be remiss to not acknowledge several important groups of people. I have benefited academically from a handful of dedicated faculty and staff members at Armstrong Atlantic State University and the University of Turku. I would particularly like to thank Marko Lehti, Kimmo Rentola, Timo Soikkanen, and Vesa Saarikoski for their advisement during my graduate studies at the University of Turku. I would also like to thank Olavi Arens and Michael Hall for their continued support and interest over the last decade - not only as an undergraduate student but also throughout my entire academic career. Additionally, Louis Clerc, Markku Jokisipilä, Auvo Kostiainen, and Vesa Vares have played an important role in helping me develop the ideas and concepts behind this project. Research for this project and my entire postgraduate studies was supported by the University of Turku’s Graduate School on Integration and Interaction in the Baltic Sea Region. I would particularly like to thank the Graduate School’s Advisory Board for their support the last five years as well as Coordinator Heli Rantala’s relentless pursuit in organizing seminars and assisting all doctoral candidates in best funding their research endeavors. An international, multi-archival project simply would not have been possible without their generosity. The nature of this project’s research necessitated a significant amount of time in various archives away from both of my homes. I am fortunate to have been assisted by a vast number of friendly and knowledgeable archivists who allowed me to navigate finding aids and sometimes byzantine organizational structures in order to find my research material. In particular, I would like to thank David Jacobs and Anatol Shmelev of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution; Daniel Necas of the University of Minnesota’s Immigration History iii Research Center; Mary Burtzloff of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library; and the Lithuanian American Council for access to their organization’s papers. There remains a long list of colleagues, advisers, and friends that has played an integral in supporting me in this work, not only in the last five years, but also over the decade. I owe the staff of Baltic Sea Region Studies Programme at the University of Turku, particularly Tarja Hyppönen, my gratitude for allowing me to teach the last five years. This experience has been profound in many ways. I would like to thank John Hiden and Jussi Hanhimäki for their comments on my project during the assessment process. They have both helped in sharpening my arguments. I am particularly grateful to Erkka Railo and Ville Laamanen for their assistance in taking care of my defense’s practical requirements while being abroad. All of my fellow doctoral candidates in the Graduate School deserve words of praise for their support and comradeship during seminars in Finland and abroad. I would also like to Matthew Adams and Adam Seipp for their friendship over two continents and their challenging of me to do my best. Finally, there are some debts to close friends and family that cannot be repaid in coin or words. Among all of my close friends, nobody comes close to the care and support that Andrea Sinn has provided over the last few years. Over my lifetime, my parents Michael and Marylu, as well as my siblings Lauren and Nicolas have helped in celebrated my successes and offered a never-ending supply of support in my shortcomings. For their honesty concerning ill-conceived initiatives and encouragement to always be ambitious, I am forever thankful. iv Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 SOURCE MATERIAL ........................................................................................................... 22 HISTORIOGRAPHICAL DISCUSSION .............................................................................. 24 CHAPTER 1: LEGACIES OF THE INTERWAR PERIOD AND WORLD WAR II .. 32 SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN THE INTERWAR BALTIC REGION ............................................. 32 TOTAL WAR: ANNEXATION AND DISPLACEMENT ...................................................................... 36 THE AMERICAN RESPONSE TO AGGRESSION IN THE EAST BALTIC ............................................. 38 WORLD WAR II AND ITS IMPACT ON NON-RECOGNITION POLICY .............................................. 44 DISPLACED PERSONS ............................................................................................................. 52 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 60 CHAPTER 2: AMERICAN POLICY TOWARDS EASTERN EUROPE AFTER WORLD WAR II AND CONTINUATION OF BALTIC POLICY ................................ 62 TENANTS OF AMERICAN POLICY TOWARDS THE SOVIET UNION AND EASTERN EUROPE ............. 66 CONTINUATION OF THE NON-RECOGNITION POLICY AND ACCREDITATION OF DIPLOMATS ....... 71 IMMIGRATION POLICY AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF BALTIC POLITICAL ORGANIZATIONS ......... 81 ESTABLISHMENT OF RELATIONS WITH THE FREE EUROPE COMMITTEE ..................................... 92 LIBERATION POLICY VERSUS LIBERATION RHETORIC ............................................................. 103 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 108 CHAPTER 3: THE QUEST FOR CONTINUITY AND COOPERATION .................. 113 BALTIC DIPLOMATIC SUCCESSION: THE DEATHS OF ALFREDS BILMANIS & JULES FELDMANS 116 THE ESTONIAN EXILE GOVERNMENT: EXILE POLITICS IN AN UNWELCOMING ENVIRONMENT .. 126 THE SUPREME COMMITTEE FOR THE LIBERATION OF LITHUANIA AND THE LITHUANIAN DIPLOMATIC SERVICE .......................................................................................................... 141 EXPANSION OF BALTIC DIPLOMATIC MISSIONS ABROAD: THE BONN DEBATE ......................... 159 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 178 CHAPTER 4: CONTAINMENT AND CONTACTS: PURSUING PSCYHOLOGICAL WARFARE AND PROPAGANDA ..................................................................................